Greetings, friends. My name is Jess McLean, and I'm here to provide you with some blueprints
Speaker:of disruption. This weekly podcast is dedicated to amplifying the work of activists, examining
Speaker:power structures, and sharing the success stories from the grassroots. Through these discussions,
Speaker:we hope to provide folks with the tools and the inspiration they need to start to dismantle
Speaker:capitalism, decolonize our spaces, and bring about the political revolution that we know
Speaker:we need. If you've been listening to the show for a while, you'll know I am no fan of the
Speaker:NDP. This hasn't always been the case. My position on and in the party shifted over time. But
Speaker:eventually I arrived at a place of complete contempt for the so-called Workers' Party.
Speaker:The stories you'll hear in this episode help explain that. And if anything, this last year
Speaker:has only solidified my position and left me more dismayed but wholly validated for where
Speaker:I'm at, thinking the NDP actively contributes to the erosion of the political left in Canada.
Speaker:Their centrist policies are shifting the spectrum, but they also have this suppressing, moderating
Speaker:effect on those who know the way forward isn't. with the systems oppressing us. A good majority
Speaker:of the members of the NDP would agree that capitalism is the problem, but the energy spent inside
Speaker:isn't engaging in anti-capitalist efforts. Instead, it's in ways where it can be maintained. The
Speaker:members knew before October 2023 that the occupation of Palestine was illegal and needed to be stopped.
Speaker:But all of that energy spent trying to get the party leaders to hold that line have produced
Speaker:next to nothing when it counts. Any sacrifices to be made to stop the genocide still rests
Speaker:on the grassroots members and massive mobilizations done without any assistance from the NDP. In
Speaker:fact, any elected officials or candidates who have dared push them on this have been sidelined
Speaker:and publicly attacked. Ontario MPP Sarah Jem is likely the most notable here, but she is
Speaker:by far from the only one. Our next guest Sean McGilvray will give you even more examples
Speaker:just from Nova Scotia. Not just candidates being removed for their support of Palestine, but
Speaker:of the countless ways in which the NDP has sold out its base. With few repercussions. This
Speaker:isn't to say that people haven't kicked up a storm or there hasn't been any bad press, but
Speaker:certainly not enough to elicit any genuine reflection or changes from leadership. Nova Scotia NDP
Speaker:is right now celebrating a three-seat gain, but their new position of official opposition
Speaker:isn't due to any vote gains from their last election in 2021. The Liberal Party there,
Speaker:as it has in other provinces, collapsed and the NDP couldn't secure any of that. The Conservatives
Speaker:have an even steeper majority now, and I can guarantee the people over there are not looking
Speaker:back and reflecting on the minor blip in the news that became of the removal of Eastern
Speaker:Passage candidate Tammy Jackman. I won't say more on that now because Sean will walk us
Speaker:through it, but Before we get into the interview, I want to speak to the NDP members still in
Speaker:the party. Still paying dues, still volunteering, maybe going door to door. What is your threshold?
Speaker:This is especially for folks angry. Sending angry emails, demanding backdoor meetings with
Speaker:their connections, attempting to hold the party accountable. Where is all that courage your
Speaker:Jack Layton spoke of? I can tell you from first-hand experience that the party has been purging
Speaker:our comrades for decades, and to a very particular end. The NDP now do nothing but serve to de-radicalize
Speaker:us, water us down, keep us cycling through the mechanisms provided to us by the ruling class.
Speaker:For all I know this was always their purpose. discouraging third ways and marginalizing the
Speaker:most radical amongst the Canadian political left. Traditionally socialists, but certainly
Speaker:not limited to. Now we use the poem. First they came for the socialists to explain what solidarity
Speaker:is, the importance of not waiting until it happens to you. But when it comes to writing wrongs
Speaker:within the party, most people just look away. You'll hear for a long time. Thousands of members
Speaker:are out there thinking they are being pragmatic by working the system, biding their time, building
Speaker:social and political capital, mostly just not knowing what else to do to secure better representation,
Speaker:better governance. And the result has been a completely unaccountable leadership, who operate
Speaker:in much the same way the Democrats do. on the fear folks have of the alternatives, and looking
Speaker:past their base towards the right. For a moment, I'd like you to imagine what we could have
Speaker:done with all that time and energy, all those donations. If the NDP had been committed to
Speaker:being an anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist party, one determined to deliver indigenous sovereignty.
Speaker:We'll never know the impact of so many generations thinking the party was the only hope to obtain
Speaker:or even influence power. How many saw this as the only legitimate entry point to politics?
Speaker:We'll never know where we could have been if the people provided with such a platform had
Speaker:been as courageous as the people fighting for a free Palestine right now. So this episode
Speaker:and really this entire podcast is about Not just proving these institutions weren't built
Speaker:for us. We feel that. We want to provide alternative ways in which we can affect change, even inside
Speaker:the legislature, without legitimizing one of the players benefiting from that system, who
Speaker:has no interest in doing the hard work. But it seems to continue to be this canon event,
Speaker:an experience one has to go through personally to appreciate it. I just wish it wasn't that
Speaker:way. I wish the playlist we've compiled that has scores of testimonies from the inception
Speaker:of the party to its current form. I wish that was enough. And the other warnings people have
Speaker:provided were enough to spur people out of that institution and into something new. But I don't
Speaker:think we're there yet. This is the same with all the stories of struggle we've shared and
Speaker:examples of revolutions we learn about. The goal is to get our people to the point of resistance
Speaker:before they have to experience the oppression so personally and devastatingly while they
Speaker:still have the energy to fight. So for now let Sean and by proxy Tammy's experience get the
Speaker:air it deserves what they're putting their hope, love, and courage into. Welcome, Sean. Can
Speaker:you introduce yourself to the Blueprints audience? Hi, my name's Sean McGilvery. Up until very
Speaker:recently, I was a dedicated New Democrat of seven years, working on activities, both in
Speaker:my local EDA and with the Central Party, including doing audio for events, making large signs,
Speaker:even doing a little bit of Oppo. Um, and now I, as a result of some recent events and no
Speaker:longer member of the party, I'm also a volunteer with some other organizations like abortion
Speaker:support services, Atlantic, and the sort of local Palestine movement in Halifax, such as
Speaker:it is I provide audio for most of their demonstrations and some of the demonstrations too, including
Speaker:those with the indigenous community. I think a lot of ears perked up right away when you
Speaker:said you were formally a member of the NDP. Let that foreshadow what this episode is going
Speaker:to be about. Let's first share the event you just alluded to. My audience may or may not
Speaker:know why I am no longer in the NDP. I'm sure that will come up today. That's a teaser. But
Speaker:why are you no longer in the party? So I, as I mentioned, have been pretty close to the
Speaker:cause of Palestinian liberation, I think, as a lot of people in the party and without the
Speaker:party have also been doing. I have been involved, like I said, for about the last year. in regular
Speaker:demonstrations to that effect. And was also pretty dedicated to working with the NDP and
Speaker:sort of not, I don't think, out of a sense of total naivety or necessarily even believing
Speaker:in the system. I feel like I tried to go about it from a very pragmatic approach. And I feel
Speaker:like even my departure had its pragmatic aspects. But all of which is to say, a candidate named
Speaker:Tammy Jakeman. who is someone I had worked with for quite a long time. I was her writing association
Speaker:president in Eastern Passage for five years. And I've been through an election with her
Speaker:and you get all the trauma bonding that goes with working on an election together. I didn't
Speaker:know you were in Eastern Passage as well. That's personal. I moved to Cole Harbor, actually
Speaker:in between the back-to-back provincial and federal elections in 2021. But I had worked with Tammy
Speaker:for most of my most formative years with the NEP. I got involved first in Eastern Passage.
Speaker:I had just moved out there and I was looking to get involved. I was even considering running
Speaker:myself because I didn't know what the level of activity was out there. And so I started
Speaker:going to NDP events and pestering people and trying to find out how to get involved. And
Speaker:eventually I ended up going to this candidate nomination meeting, which was already an acclaimed
Speaker:nomination and got involved with that candidate's campaign. And from there remained active with
Speaker:the party in Eastern passage as it's riding association president as so frequently happens
Speaker:once you get involved. I'm trying to count on my hands like how many people I don't have
Speaker:that many fingers have given that entry point, you know It's not to say that your story isn't
Speaker:special. I'm sorry Sean, but yeah, it's just um, that is very reminiscent of most people's
Speaker:experience I think you know you tiptoe in and then you You quickly get involved. I keep finding
Speaker:this way and I'm gonna date myself this way But I keep finding ways to invoke this slogan
Speaker:from a TV show called candid camera And it had this sort of theme song jingle sort of thing.
Speaker:And the tagline was sort of like, when you least expect it, you're elected. And once that's
Speaker:the thing is like, it's very difficult and opaque as to how to get involved with the party initially,
Speaker:but once you do, God help you. Like once, once you're in, you'll be, it'll be turning down
Speaker:the reader, calling me to join the executive and calling me to do this and that. And, but
Speaker:anyway, so I worked with Tammy Jacob for a long time. And I also have been working with someone
Speaker:named Rana Zaman for a while too, on these rallies. And Rana was a federal candidate and she was
Speaker:booted from her federal candidacy after handily winning a contested nomination, which she clearly
Speaker:brought out tons of her community. She won the contest and then the party capitulated to Cija
Speaker:as they've done so many times and Cija of course has its local affiliate here at the Atlantic
Speaker:Jewish council and they're affiliated with many such councils across the country. And so they
Speaker:objected to specifically a post of Rana's. which criticized Israel's actions during the Great
Speaker:March of Return, criticizing them for, you know, having their snipers, murder medics and maim
Speaker:children and doing, you know, all the sorts of things that they documented we did. And
Speaker:Seja, of course, objected to that and the party ended Rana's candidacy rather quickly after
Speaker:that. And she, I felt this was one of the most embarrassing things. And Jess, I know that
Speaker:you've had lots of opportunity for embarrassment at the hands of the NDP. But I, this was still
Speaker:I think in more ways, you know, being at the subsequent nomination meeting where the losing
Speaker:candidate was acclaimed anyway, votes were taken and discarded, but then their membership money
Speaker:was taken and kept. And there are Muslims out front of our nomination meeting protesting.
Speaker:Truly not just much. Justifiably. Having worked with Rana made me familiar with the regularity
Speaker:with which the NDP ends candidacies over those candidates' support for Palestine. You know,
Speaker:you think of Paul Manley. who won the second Green Party seat ever after the Fed Party ended
Speaker:his candidacy again on thin allegations of anti-Semitism. And so they demonstrate not knowing that they're
Speaker:willing to bow down. They're willing to lose seats over it and have lost at least one seat
Speaker:over it. But this isn't what caused you to leave the party, is it? This is leading up to it
Speaker:because I had a great sensitivity to this exact issue. Like this was, and that's why I want
Speaker:to underscore, like when the NSNDP sort of on behalf of Sija bullied Tammy into ending her
Speaker:candidacy. This was the one line the party couldn't cross with the one person that couldn't cross
Speaker:it with me. And especially with me having this enhanced knowledge of like, you know, the party
Speaker:has this history of chucking people because of their support for Palestine. This was the
Speaker:reason pretty much that I stopped considering offering for the NDP that I stopped considering
Speaker:running is that like, they have demonstrated their cowards on this issue. And I don't think
Speaker:that like my greatest risk in running for the NDP is the NDP. That's the threat. And after
Speaker:a year of all the things we're seeing on our phones, the absolute stuff that only first
Speaker:responders see, like some horrifying things, after seeing a year of that and after having
Speaker:to call the leader of the party to account in provincial council, after having done all those
Speaker:things, they did just the worst possible thing they could have done. And this is one of the
Speaker:reasons why my decision to leave was nearly instant once I read the party's message and
Speaker:their sort of throwing of Tammy under the bus. To run you through the events of it briefly,
Speaker:from my perspective, I guess, I got a call on like the Saturday of the second weekend of
Speaker:the election. It was from the chief of staff of the party, James Pratt, with which you might
Speaker:have some familiarity because you knew he was involved the second I mentioned it happened.
Speaker:I have many little birdies. I'll just tell you that many little birdies. You immediately responded,
Speaker:James Pratt. I was like, I didn't say anything about James Pratt. Neither did the article
Speaker:I just said. Like whenever the party fucks up, my DMs are just absolutely full with what happened.
Speaker:Totally. I bet they are. So this is what happened. They called me and they said, and what they
Speaker:said to me is basically what they did. They sort of told her that CJ was going to make
Speaker:her life miserable, that her candidacy would only get worse. And it was kind of like, we'll
Speaker:allow you to continue, but you're doomed if you do. They called me to tell me that she
Speaker:had elected to end her candidacy. And I think the reason they did this is that they knew
Speaker:that I would walk. Damage control or attempted. Yeah, they were, he was like, this is the thing
Speaker:like this, this James guy really think like they're what the way he put it to me was that,
Speaker:you know, there's no local regional legacy media on politics in Nova Scotia on a long weekend.
Speaker:So we're going to do it now. We're going to try and wait out the weekend, keep our heads
Speaker:down and hope it goes away. These don't take the weekend off cell phones and social media
Speaker:accounts. Don't take the weekend off, unfortunately. And, and so that's something they didn't consider
Speaker:in their strategy. And I think it might have come back to bite them a little bit. And I
Speaker:think I was. part of that. They called me to like, and to try and feign concern for Tammy
Speaker:too, which is one of the really galling things about this is they're, they're faint, they're
Speaker:making it as if they're protecting her. When people write to them, the party has been responding
Speaker:first by, you know, feigning concern for Tammy and then validating the smear against her that
Speaker:CJ has made, which is that it's a conflation to talk about. And this was the week everyone
Speaker:learned the word conflation apparently, because I keep hearing it all of a sudden that it's
Speaker:a conflation to say that what's happening in Gaza is a genocide. Effectively, you can't
Speaker:because Tammy quote tweeted the Auschwitz Memorial and said something about the Israel, the genocide
Speaker:happening in Gaza right now. And that's what the party is saying is a conflation and quote
Speaker:unquote. And it's not, but in addition to capitulating to what they have told me is a bunch of bullying
Speaker:because, you know, James is on his phone call to me, told me, oh, you know, we see just so
Speaker:awful and their tactics are just a bullying and it's, and it's, it's such a shame. Oh,
Speaker:it's, you know, it's, I think, I think that is part of it for sure. I do, I do think that
Speaker:You know, people have talked about Zionists have infiltrated the party and like there is
Speaker:the odd Zionist in that party like I've met them and had like discussions about their annoying
Speaker:centrist political beliefs in the comment sections of my tech talks but. But ultimately, this
Speaker:is tactical cowardice and incompetence to an extent, and I think that is going to be born
Speaker:out I think it's going to be born out that it did them more damage to capitulate than to
Speaker:stand up to. What is effectively a third party lobby group in the in acting in the interest
Speaker:of a foreign country. This is a thing like the whole like you might want to say and provincial
Speaker:politicians might want to say, you know, Palestine is not a provincial political issue. But what
Speaker:is of issue, I think, to Canadians right now nationally is foreign interference in our electoral
Speaker:process. And that's what we're seeing right now we're seeing an organization with another
Speaker:nation's name in its name. bullying our politicians into pulling candidates. And I think that we
Speaker:should be seeing this at least partially through a lens of foreign interference in our electoral
Speaker:politics, because that's exactly what's happening. I don't even care where it comes from. It's
Speaker:based on upholding a genocide and an illegal occupation. Canadian politicians, I mean, some
Speaker:of the NDP might be an exception, but this is the Canadian project as well, right? We are
Speaker:colonial occupation. We... we operated much in the same way we committed a genocide that
Speaker:we don't want people talking about and we sure as hell don't want them attributing it to the
Speaker:Canadian state. We like to pass that on to the English as though we had nothing to do with
Speaker:it. But yeah, I think like one of the
Speaker:Folks can see the polls and they can see the liberal slipping and they can see a couple
Speaker:of good ads they might like by the NDP. But all in all, this kind of behavior that you've
Speaker:seen, that Sean has described in just Nova Scotia, we have seen in Ontario, we have seen in British
Speaker:Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, we have testaments from all of those places of them behaving like
Speaker:this, and the repercussions. Now sure, most of the public doesn't give a shit about the
Speaker:Eastern Passage candidate for NDP. Like, let's be honest, we love Tammy, you know her, we
Speaker:don't think it's right and as part of the progressive family we care, but the NDP sees it won't carry
Speaker:any political damage from this. But they completely rely on the labour of people who are sold.
Speaker:on them as a mechanism for change. The people that do labour for them believe their voice
Speaker:should matter within the party and for the most part have immovable values. And they're just
Speaker:breaking all of these pressure points, like for you it was someone close to you, for other
Speaker:people it's a certain issue they won't hit on. Their failure to get behind disabled people
Speaker:and you know there's tons of examples. of them being vindictive against autistic members and
Speaker:candidates trying to remove them for their advocacy against ABA. Like that's a shout out to Joel
Speaker:Harden who many people admire and think he is a form of positive change but even he admittedly
Speaker:behaved in this very way, you know, didn't like what people had to say and thought to remove
Speaker:them from the party. You're losing all of this labor. Even if you're just talking about like
Speaker:the signs and all the work Sean does alone for the very small province of Nova Scotia, whose
Speaker:resources within that party are so depleted, some would describe as the party doesn't really
Speaker:exist there. I mean, from other provinces, if you looked at the activity that, you know,
Speaker:Ontario and some other provinces have, it's shocking when you talk to how many people are
Speaker:actually active within the East Coast provinces for the NDP. So the labor, it's not normal
Speaker:for someone to do signs for 10 writings. My point is that once they go into this federal
Speaker:election or any even a provincial election, they need the same people they've burned to
Speaker:do a lot of the legwork. You know, young people come in finding their way in politics. I just
Speaker:talked to a new patron of ours who's just again finding their way in politics and thinking
Speaker:perhaps their first step would be to contact their local NDP writing association. You can
Speaker:only imagine what my advice was, however, you know, I do say people sometimes have to go
Speaker:into this system, see it, so they can fully understand how electoral politics actually
Speaker:works, so that when you need to apply pressure, you know, you don't waste your time in certain
Speaker:positions. But the damage that they're doing through, through acts like this, that they
Speaker:don't really sit and think about, you know, like they're just concerned of like, will this
Speaker:Nova Scotia media pick this up and blow What will that mean? And they try to do calculations
Speaker:and really none of them seem to involve. Like, what will this do to our base? Like there's
Speaker:the whole like don't attribute to malfeasance. What can be explained by incompetence sort
Speaker:of argument where like, yeah, I know they've grossly over like miscalculated. This is the
Speaker:thing is like not only are these people venal and amoral, they're bad at their jobs. So James
Speaker:Pratt and you can, you're probably better qualified to offer a background on James Pratt than I
Speaker:am. But my understanding is that he was. Jack Layton's campaign manager or something to that
Speaker:effect. He's also the person who gave Matthew Wieldon, who was a federal candidate elsewhere
Speaker:in Nova Scotia, a few elections back, gave him half an hour to rescind his candidacy or it
Speaker:was going to be rescinded for him for the same reasons. There are young folks coming into
Speaker:the party. Like there's that joke about I've seen this meme go around of, you know, there's
Speaker:a like an E-girl and like a really old man asleep. sitting in his seat like next to each other
Speaker:on the bus and it's described as like this is what every NDP EDA meeting looks like. Very
Speaker:very young people and then very old people. A lot of whom want the same things actually
Speaker:I think people sometimes think that like oh there's too many old people in the party and
Speaker:that's the problem it's like if anything there's too many of my generation in the party there's
Speaker:too many Gen Xers like Gen X centrists where you have like the old folks who joined the
Speaker:party 20 years ago who joined an explicitly socialist party and absolutely want those policies
Speaker:and the young people who want socialist policies now and think that's the party they've joined,
Speaker:not realizing that Thomas Mulcair has gotten in and mucked with the Constitution and all
Speaker:these things and it's been watered down and it's nearly ideologically, you know, identical
Speaker:to the liberals, federally and I think in Nova Scotia too. I'm hearing from candidates that
Speaker:say our campaign lost all momentum after that happened. I'm hearing people saying that like
Speaker:supporters are ripping their signs out of their lawns, they're retracting their offers to donate,
Speaker:they're retracting their offers to volunteer now saying, I don't know who to vote for. So
Speaker:it's an election issue now. Yeah, let's hit on why it bothered so many people this time.
Speaker:Because I mean, surely over in Nova Scotia, you folks aren't in some sort of bubble. You've
Speaker:seen what the Ontario NDP has done to Sarah Jama, and how they just generally behaved with
Speaker:the Israeli lobby. I don't know if you folks are all over there satisfied that Heather McPherson
Speaker:is wearing a pin and standing up and hollering once in a while in the legislature, but they
Speaker:have been far from champions for Palestine and have kicked countless people out of the party.
Speaker:I mean, I'm included in that. We can't remove ourselves from the fact that we're in a different
Speaker:time now. Like when we're talking about Palestine, you talked about Canada getting removed in
Speaker:2018. Right? return was in 2018, early 2019. So, you know, people's knee-jerk reaction to
Speaker:seeing someone removed over Palestine would not hit the same as it does now, right? Absolutely.
Speaker:Because it's hard to imagine anybody who's seen what we've seen for the last year and still
Speaker:not doing everything possible, including defending candidates who are being demonized by Sijah,
Speaker:even as they acknowledge how awful Sijah is. Right. So to not have that courage in this
Speaker:moment is unquestionable. You know, like you just we don't understand it and we are finding
Speaker:courage where we maybe never had it before. And, you know, I think that the Heather McPherson
Speaker:thing and the like Matthew Green in the in the House of Commons with their, you know, the
Speaker:kofi is or watermelon pins or whatever. I hearing the leader recite Sija talking points when
Speaker:he's asked about Palestine and he starts talking about scared Jews in Montreal. when he's not
Speaker:been asked about that and he's pivoting to all the same talking points he's been fed by this
Speaker:organization. It really just makes Matthew Green's efforts look like Nancy Pelosi and Kenton.
Speaker:Yes, people need to understand Heather and Matthew were just tokens to make sure that they capture
Speaker:folks so that anybody that is on the fence that just needs something, anything to hold on to
Speaker:an electoral politics can say, well, oh, the NDP at least are standing up and saying X,
Speaker:Y and Z. They are starting petitions where nobody else is doing anything. I mean, I talked to
Speaker:somebody who was really thrilled about their bear in Mississauga and how awesome they were.
Speaker:And I was like, we're ready to throw a fucking parade because somebody's trying to uphold
Speaker:the charter. Like someone's doing the bear fucking minimum. And we're like, oh, thank you so much.
Speaker:Like I will forget all the other things that you've ever done because there's just like
Speaker:one little glimmer of hope there. So I want to ask folks, like I want to ask you, but like
Speaker:I think there's a lot of people out there listening that are in the same boat. And I was, I saw
Speaker:them do horrible things, you know, prop up John Horgan while he sicked the RCMP on land offenders
Speaker:and was just clearing old growth and brought him into federal convention at that very year
Speaker:when there was a petition against him, like no distancing of that awfulness. And so many
Speaker:people walked from the party then. I stayed. I stayed because I thought I could change the
Speaker:party, right? And I stayed with a lot of other comrades who thought the same thing. But then,
Speaker:you know, like it was, I mean, eventually they kicked me out for trying to change the party,
Speaker:but many, many people dropped out. There were trigger points for everyone. Sarah Jama was
Speaker:a big trigger point again. And then Nova Scotia now has had its own trigger point. But from
Speaker:your perspective, why did you stay after they gave you so many reasons to leave? I ultimately
Speaker:thought I did think that I could at least exert some leverage. I don't know if I thought that
Speaker:I could fundamentally change the party. There was an inflection point after again, after
Speaker:having been involved for a long time and involved especially in a lot of like central activities
Speaker:and around the governance. You were probably out by the time the 2021 federal convention
Speaker:happened, but it was a technical debacle in addition to being a procedural and no, I think
Speaker:I ran as federal president there. Oh, really? Was that the one? I'm pretty sure that's the
Speaker:year I ran for party president. First name starts with a D. Last name was Koli, K-O-H. Yeah,
Speaker:DJ. Yeah, that was my opponent. We got 30% of the vote with the two-week campaign. And was
Speaker:that the one where they very, very obviously filibustered the Palestine bill? Yes. Like,
Speaker:nakedly so. In fact, I would argue they did it in a way that made it clear that someone
Speaker:had their finger on the scale procedurally, because. The chair has an earpiece the entire
Speaker:time, and whenever there's conflict. sits and waits and listens for instructions. Folks who
Speaker:missed that, this was the filibuster of all time, but just very quickly, it was so bad
Speaker:that they'd stretched the discussion prior to that. It was something to do with a situation
Speaker:in India. I'm not even going to pretend to have all the details for whatever that was. And
Speaker:it got to the point where people rebutting revisions... What do you call the amendments? Sorry, people
Speaker:who were rebutting amendments had written talking points. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So they had anticipated
Speaker:the suggested amendment and they had written already three minutes of talking points to
Speaker:refute that. And this went back and forth and back and forth. Whereas any other issue, you
Speaker:would have had somebody be able to get to the mic and call the question saying, we've talked
Speaker:about this enough. Let's call the question. We don't have all day to spend on this. That
Speaker:never. really happened with that particular motion and it left like two minutes for the
Speaker:Palestinian question. So they really just didn't want any back and forth. They would allow people
Speaker:to read like the first statement and then they sent it to a vote. The reason I kind of went
Speaker:out on this, even though it's not really what we're talking about, because when we talk,
Speaker:when people talk about reforming the NDP, we have like so many episodes dedicated to like
Speaker:the different mechanisms within the party and how they work and convention. is one of the
Speaker:most controlled spaces in the party, yet it holds the only key to accessing the levers
Speaker:of power within the party. The alleged levers of power, the democratic positions, right,
Speaker:so they elect an executive council that is supposed to run the party and then there's another episode
Speaker:that explains that it doesn't actually run the party anyway. So winning those elections doesn't
Speaker:really do much anyway, but they've done whatever possible to just completely control those spaces,
Speaker:which in the end controls the dialogue within the party, because that is the only space that
Speaker:members actually get to get into a same room with like all their counterparts and MPs and
Speaker:party brass and unions and discuss what it means to be an NDP'er. Like where are we going to
Speaker:stand on these very important issues? And it's only the most popular issues that get talked
Speaker:about. So even with the in its legitimate design, the design that everyone smiles and nods and
Speaker:says, this sounds really democratic, everyone just votes on what we're even going to talk
Speaker:about. So only the most popular and agreed upon points even end up on the agenda in the first
Speaker:place. So, you know, part of this episode isn't just hear Sean's story. It's also for me to
Speaker:kind of get out. the many, many ways in which the NDP serves as like a very moderating force
Speaker:for us as a space where we spin our wheels and de-radicalize, not as individuals, but as effectiveness
Speaker:because you have real radicals still in there thinking, you know, they're fighting for the
Speaker:abolishment of police and prisons and free transit, things that shouldn't be radical, but you know
Speaker:what I'm talking about. They're there, but... they are not getting anywhere within that party.
Speaker:And if you look at the Palestinian cause, as an example of this, decades were spent trying
Speaker:to get the party to take a half decent position on this. And not only were they like just unpopular
Speaker:at the time, like you just couldn't get members to come along and that work had to be done
Speaker:and it took a long time. And maybe it took exposing of the Israeli state a little bit more, a little
Speaker:bit more on masking to get people along. But in the end, we found out that wasn't the case.
Speaker:We know that it was just thwarting by party brass for years and years since the years of
Speaker:Jack Layton, and they've only gotten better at it suppressing the Palestinian question,
Speaker:so to speak, all across in every way imaginable. And that is just one issue that even once you
Speaker:thought there was a glimmer of hope, even when people started to celebrate the fact that they
Speaker:finally took a decent position on where they stood with Israel. I don't remember the language
Speaker:that was finally adopted. But in practice, it meant nothing but a watermelon pen, the calling
Speaker:for a ceasefire without the celebration of Palestinian resistance whatsoever. This touches on nearly
Speaker:every organization, every institution, I think, nearly in existence in our society, is that
Speaker:there is this divide between the ostensible democratic governance of that institution and-
Speaker:the staff layer of that institution and the relationship between those two things and the
Speaker:way that we seek to check the power of one over the other. And I think that conventions are
Speaker:great example, you know, we labor over these policy positions and we research them and we
Speaker:debate them and we pass them. They go into a policy book and that policy book goes on a
Speaker:shelf. It might as well go in the shredder. And what people think that they're doing when
Speaker:they do that is that they think that they're instructing caucus what to do. But they're
Speaker:not. They're instructing the party, which is a separate entity, to ask caucus to do something.
Speaker:And that's the most leverage you'll ever get over caucus. And it doesn't really mean anything.
Speaker:And there was a motion that was passed after convention at one of our provincial councils
Speaker:in Nova Scotia asking that the party provide regular reports as to how each of the policy
Speaker:positions in our policy book that is now constituted of all these resolutions people have made.
Speaker:They asked them for regular reporting as to progress on each of those. And all of the caucus
Speaker:people and staff people all objected to it. They're going to do their like whatever Pric
Speaker:campaign they delivered this time, whatever platform is what's going to come out. And they
Speaker:did a big platform consultation to manufacture consent, but none of it means anything. I was
Speaker:at those consultations. I heard the things that people were asking for and none of them are
Speaker:in the platform. No one's asking for a gas tax holiday during a climate crisis. No one's asking
Speaker:for you to lock in a 2.5% rent increase for landlords who rapaciously increased their rents
Speaker:as much as they possibly could when people were at their most desperate. All kinds of awesome
Speaker:things that people in the party wanted and the mechanism that is put in front of them to ostensibly
Speaker:provide that is a sham. Yeah. I'll link folks to another episode that where we walk through
Speaker:the many mechanisms and actually the very deliberate choices made under Jack Layton. to remove the
Speaker:power of the policy book from the platform or private members bills or any possibility of
Speaker:like tangible work on those issues. I am going to be devil's advocate for just a second. Well,
Speaker:I've had many people, you know, come back at me for, you know, all the things that we're
Speaker:saying right now, obviously. I'm sure you have too. And one of the things that I have learned
Speaker:to hate most, and you use this word, so this is just, this is also a mini attack on you.
Speaker:So just come at me is they would argue that by behaving the way that they are doing in
Speaker:the current political climate, whatever that means, they're being pragmatic. They are going
Speaker:after maybe low hanging fruit, whatever they can get. Be realistic, Sean. We're not going
Speaker:to get dad in Nova Scotia. So they are doing what they think is possible within the systems
Speaker:available to them. And surely you can relate, right? And we've all been there. Like I am
Speaker:not, I have been completely open into my many years of trying to use the mechanisms within
Speaker:the party and, and elsewhere. That's one of my points there on how they moderate us is
Speaker:by forcing that pragmatic approach or. selling that as the most reasonable way forward. There
Speaker:was a speech I heard just today, it was about pragmatism. And so when you said that word,
Speaker:I wrote it down and underlined it. And I was like, I've got to go back to that speech. So
Speaker:I'm going to play it here. And then we'll react together, because it's a struggle that everyone
Speaker:has, right? When we're talking about electoral politics being the kind of pragmat approach,
Speaker:we can't abandon it. And anyway.
Speaker:gathered here on the streets instead of in that room up there look at the hundreds of people
Speaker:Vancouver, in Halifax, in Fredericton, and know that we are reading these same words, that
Speaker:we are orienting to the same horizon of Palestinian liberation, and know that another kind of literary
Speaker:world, one that doesn't traffic in blood money and self-interest, but in solidarity and collective
Speaker:power, already exists because we the people have made it so. This year, the Giller closed
Speaker:its gala doors on everyone but literary and corporate elites. So we brought our counter
Speaker:gala to their door and to the streets. We fielded a lot of critiques in bad faith from people
Speaker:like the ones who are who are in that room across the street at the Giller gala since this campaign
Speaker:started. Literary elites who have said we're criticized us for expanding our targets to
Speaker:include indigo books and the Israeli foundation. for not trying to make slow institutional change
Speaker:from the inside of the sector, for not trying to find a third way, a more quote unquote pragmatic
Speaker:way. And to that, I wanna share the words of the political theorist, Joy James, who writes,
Speaker:"'If you're gonna use the word pragmatic "'to discipline radicals, "'my preference is that
Speaker:you say nothing at all.'" If you want to discipline rebels, then pony up something tangible. Raise
Speaker:bail funds, pay for their attorneys, feed their kids while they're inside, or try to get them
Speaker:out. You cannot lecture risk-taking people about being politically infantile out of your own
Speaker:accumulations. There's nobody we admire who is pragmatic. Everybody could have been pragmatic,
Speaker:but if they were, we would not have any ancestors. So I want to do away with this false binary
Speaker:between writers and organizers. Culture alone, the work we do on the page will not be enough.
Speaker:Reasoning with, trying to reform the cultural institutions that prop up this state will not
Speaker:be enough. We have to be willing, at the very least, to take risks for each other, to relinquish
Speaker:the false accolades, the fancy galas, all of them the oppressor's incentives to keep us
Speaker:from actively building solidarity with each other. rated E for everything. I'll leave that
Speaker:in, but that definitely is rated for everyone. OK, let me just talk about that for a second,
Speaker:and then I'm going to go to you. OK, Sean, because I'm sure you heard it, but I'm going to draw
Speaker:the parallels to the NDP there. What you heard there was a member of the Writers Against the
Speaker:War on Gaza. We had them on to talk about their resistance to the Giller Prize that is funded
Speaker:by Scotiabank. And as you've heard, they've expanded. their horizons, they've also included
Speaker:tactics that would definitely not be described as pragmatic. And when she speaks of, you know,
Speaker:another world, she's encouraging authors to see beyond the structures created by Scotiabank
Speaker:and the Giller Prize, because it's not just a gala, right? It's readings and it's an economy
Speaker:of its own within that particular sector. And that's what keeps people scared of put- butting
Speaker:up against it because they feel like that would eat into their bottom line or the possibility
Speaker:of exposure or getting their word out, being heard, right? The writers having their voice
Speaker:silenced and she's encouraging them, there is already other systems there. We are demonstrating
Speaker:this to you. You don't have to be in those gallows. You don't have to be in those rooms to effect
Speaker:change. And this wasn't to say, you know, you hear her scolding perhaps people who would
Speaker:lecture. radicals, right? That's not to say that's what Sean was doing. But we definitely
Speaker:do get lectured on being pragmatic within the NDP. That is something as soon as you try to
Speaker:reform it from within, you will have long time members come to you and maybe they'll say there's
Speaker:no point. You're not the first person to do this. Use what's there. This is what's possible
Speaker:within this realm. I I've got an inside line with Merit. I'm going to sit down and talk
Speaker:to Merit about the wrongdoings her party is doing. And I will come back to you folks and
Speaker:tell you what she said. Backdoor solutions, right, that remain open to just a few. So the
Speaker:NDP parallel there to the speech you just heard is also the maintaining of legitimacy through
Speaker:using use elites. And that doesn't mean financial elites within the party, but I mean insiders,
Speaker:people with friends in the party, with connections, with the ability to maybe be heard once in
Speaker:a while, and they really close out to everybody else. They're still unable to maintain, but
Speaker:they lean heavily on those insiders and that kind of exclusivity. So after hearing that,
Speaker:you know, and talking about trying to remain in the party and be... as pragmatic as possible
Speaker:and there are still mechanisms in there, you know, surely influence can be wielded. Like,
Speaker:how do you feel about all that now? Well, it's funny. And one thing I really had to acknowledge
Speaker:from that speech is, is the use of the term third way, because this is obviously a term
Speaker:that we've certainly heard before in the NDP. And you know, where we're talking about the
Speaker:latent era, you know, I don't know if, if a lot of people share this view of mine, but
Speaker:In my view, Leighton was the beginning of the end of a meaningful left in the NDP. I think
Speaker:that was in the same way that like when I'm door knocking and the people who hate poor
Speaker:people and drug addicts the most are the people who got just a little taste, they just get,
Speaker:they've got me like a side by side in their driveway or they got like a nice, like a little,
Speaker:little boat or like a skidoo or maybe a nice truck and like when I was going to the door,
Speaker:uh, with, uh, free ambulance rides on the platform. last time provincially we offered. We're gonna
Speaker:wave ambulance fees. So radical. Right, and people were furious. That junkies are gonna
Speaker:be using that as a taxi service. And our hospital's in an industrial park in Dartmouth. And when
Speaker:the NDP got a little taste of proximity to power with the electoral result they got from the
Speaker:Jack Laitin campaign, that was it. And they were all in on orange liberalism and getting
Speaker:outflanked by the liberals on the left, you know, campaign after campaign. Hearing the
Speaker:Third Way invoked with the word pragmatism in the same sentence, it really causes you to
Speaker:think of like, you know, this is like, you can easily see like, this is how we got here in
Speaker:a lot of ways. And you can definitely, there's definitely an argument to be made for that.
Speaker:I think that in terms of what I did in the party, I feel relatively good. Like I was the only
Speaker:person to speak up at a number of junctures, the only person to try and hold power to account
Speaker:when no one else really did, in front of like an audience of their peers, like in provincial
Speaker:council, like having the... Rules and Privileges Committee hauled in front of provincial council
Speaker:to explain a decision they had made, a disciplinary decision where they protected someone who was
Speaker:transphobic. I remember. When the leader got up in the legislature and said, I condemn Hamas,
Speaker:bad things are bad, blah, said nothing about Israel when Israel's already well into its
Speaker:carpet bombing campaign. Because she had said, you know, targeted attacks on civilians and
Speaker:children are never acceptable. And so the question I put to her after a brief intro was... Will
Speaker:you now condemn the state of Israel for their targeted attacks on women and children? And
Speaker:what happened, her answer was almost immaterial, because what happened immediately then was
Speaker:the entire room erupted in applause. And that's not really a thing that happens at provincial
Speaker:council meetings. You know what I mean? Like, it's a business meeting. You go through every
Speaker:line of the budget. It's just rubber stamping things. It's procedural stuff, right? So it's
Speaker:not a rah-rah thing for the most part. And so in establishing that and in building the social
Speaker:capital it took to get that to happen, to get people to listen to me. Because they eventually,
Speaker:over time, after I've been involved for seven years, people in the party will hear me out.
Speaker:When I get on that microphone, which is not very often, but when I do, they listen. And
Speaker:for me to have the opportunity to be in the room and to demonstrate to the leadership that
Speaker:they're out of step with the membership on this issue and they need to change course. I wouldn't
Speaker:have been in that position if I hadn't stayed as long as I did. So like, what did it accomplish?
Speaker:I don't know. You knew that would be my question, Ayesha. You can't argue in favor of pragmatism
Speaker:and not have any results to show for it. Right? This is the thing. You can't, if you're going
Speaker:to lay claim to pragmatism, you have to produce some results and I don't know if it did with
Speaker:the leadership, but leaders can be replaced. If we finally get a leadership race anywhere,
Speaker:I mean, that thing seems to be on by the wayside for the party, too. Well, yeah, because the
Speaker:knives don't come out, I don't think, quickly enough in this party when leaders lose. We
Speaker:just expect to lose. And this is the thing about this sort of third-way centrist approach the
Speaker:party is taking is that the proposition used to be adhere to your values and you'll probably
Speaker:lose. But now the proposition is surrender your values and lose anyway. And it's a fundamentally
Speaker:unattractive proposition. And that's what kind of like, you know, there's just like, if that's
Speaker:the proposition, like, why am I even doing this? Like, you know, like publicly sell out my values
Speaker:and then pick up like five seats. You know, there's just like the cost benefit doesn't
Speaker:work. But in terms of like what I did in the party and what I did with my time in the party
Speaker:and the way that I left the party even, I didn't just like, okay, well, I'm done. Like I tried
Speaker:to make it count. I tried to, because I felt like I had an opportunity. in leaving and in
Speaker:doing so publicly and in naming names, I felt that I had an opportunity, hopefully, to shift
Speaker:the perception of this sort of like standard operating procedure just capitulating to CJ.
Speaker:They're making the calculus that it will be easier to capitulate and we need to change
Speaker:that. And I thought I had an opportunity to change that and I took it. I don't, I don't
Speaker:know that anyone else really did anything of that level. I don't think anyone else necessarily
Speaker:like walked away. So like, I don't know, like, that's kind of how I feel about my time. I
Speaker:can't tell you that it's worth For everything I put in, I don't think I can sit here and
Speaker:tell you that it was, that it, like, that's something that I think everyone should do.
Speaker:I think you should go and invest a bunch of years in a party that, like, is probably doomed
Speaker:and then throw a big flip when you quit. And that wasn't my end goal. I really did aspire
Speaker:to exert internal influence on the party, and it's whether we like it or not, electoralism
Speaker:is how power is decided in our society. For now. the most part. Like, we talk about people
Speaker:party a lot and we have a lot of demonstrations and we do some direct actions and whatever,
Speaker:but like, that's how power by and large is decided in our society. And I don't feel like as a
Speaker:person of relative privilege, I don't feel like I can just kind of, like, walk away from that.
Speaker:I feel like I feel obliged to engage with it somehow in some way that hopefully has some
Speaker:kind of positive objectives. Okay, I'm going to push back on that. Definitely it's how we
Speaker:select representation, but I would argue it's not how power is decided. you've just explained
Speaker:very much so that, you know, Sija wielded a lot more power than the entire provincial council
Speaker:or, you know, generally if you polled people living here, people living in Nova Scotia on
Speaker:how they felt about the genocide in Israel, that's not what's influencing them. So powerful
Speaker:decisions are being made by capital interest, it seems. We can say foreign, but again, we've
Speaker:a million times over boiled this down to imperialism and the interests of US interests and capital
Speaker:interests, and that's really what the genocide in Gaza is about in the end. So I wouldn't
Speaker:say we are abandoning electoralism. We're definitely abandoning partisanship because that's really
Speaker:got us nowhere because we're not abandoning electoralism because... In essence, we already
Speaker:have. If you look at the NDP even as like the most progressive option, we elect landlords,
Speaker:lawyers, we put advisors in charge, corporate advisors, you know, lobbyists that also work
Speaker:for Metro, groceries, Airbnb, big oil and gas. In essence, by propping up... a party like
Speaker:the NDP, you are abandoning it to the capitalist class still. It's our behavior within this
Speaker:electoral system, in this representative democracy, in the way that we view the best of us, right,
Speaker:who should go represent the best of us. And we have seem to seemingly collectively decided
Speaker:that it's the richest amongst us. I mean, the system also requires money, but even when we
Speaker:do a lot to mitigate that, we still are looking to elites to lead us. We are still selecting
Speaker:them from amongst other choices and for the most part and so in the end although we've
Speaker:done all these contests we've sent the same class off to make decisions against our best
Speaker:interest. Part of it goes back to the professionalization of the party that began or related it's one
Speaker:of the reasons I say that he's sort of the beginning of the ending like I see it I see it through
Speaker:the lens a lot of businessy language. Like what we're doing is moving forward on a go-forward
Speaker:basis with best practices. Like that's what they're doing. Even the way they refer to members,
Speaker:you're like paying units now. Oh yeah, no, it's a business. Like this, and that's, I think,
Speaker:how some of the staffers see it because that's their, it's their job to an extent. Like I
Speaker:think that, and there is an extent to which I think that we see the class interests of
Speaker:the consultant class represented in platform, because that's who it's actually coming from.
Speaker:I don't think it's not meaningfully coming from the membership. I think they tried to obtain...
Speaker:consent from the membership to do something when they did platform consultations this time
Speaker:which were new but I don't think it I don't see a line between what was said in those meetings
Speaker:and what made it its way into the platform I think it was all you know Pricewaterhouse Cooper
Speaker:didn't delight it to death if I had realized like who they had gotten themselves in bed
Speaker:with because he's a new hire right he's he was only hired I think in the last year when somebody
Speaker:went on mat leave he goes around he works his way around yeah so I mean I once I once I started
Speaker:finding out about him I was like oh here we go it's we've got we caught Fed party disease
Speaker:we caught We got the contagion of the federal party with. Well we passed our awful provincial
Speaker:director onto the federal party. So it's just, it's all polluted. Right. Like this is the
Speaker:Anne McGrath thing or Lucy Watson, one of those Lucy Watson, Lucy Watson became the federal
Speaker:director, like the notorious like, and yeah, and watching, you know, I've been basically
Speaker:checked out of the federal party since 2021 when Jim Ead Singh had a big like everyone
Speaker:here's John Horgan. He's really great and awesome. And then the next day he announced that he
Speaker:was going to go ahead with the site. See damn. And that was when I called the federal party
Speaker:and had them cancel my PAC. But yeah, I at the time was like based on the way the membership
Speaker:felt in the meetings and based on some conversations I'd had in private with some of the caucus,
Speaker:I had hoped that there was the some runway for them to take a more really appropriate position
Speaker:on this and that they would show some leadership and they just didn't. And it's like, I feel
Speaker:I feel let down. And again, because I, you know, we talk about resources and who's provided
Speaker:resources when I agreed to do the science for the party, they agreed to provide me a number
Speaker:of things they did not provide. And so, because I needed those things, namely volunteers. I
Speaker:had to very publicly on my Instagram just basically become like Captain NDP and I've got my hat
Speaker:on and I'm showing all the tools that I use and I'm showing all the signs and I'm putting
Speaker:up and I'm like, come join the NDP sign army and I've recruited 20 of my own volunteers.
Speaker:I had to so publicly advocate for the party to get the resources that I needed that when
Speaker:they publicly did this, they left me no choice. And that's one thing that they probably was
Speaker:probably lost on them is like, well, I've very publicly been like the like the only two things
Speaker:on my Instagram page are Palestine and the NDP basically. And like, you've put me in the position
Speaker:where one of them has to go. Because they're mutually exclusive at this point because of
Speaker:the cowardice they've shown and because of the way that they continue to smear this candidate.
Speaker:Yeah, I mean, at that point. For me, the pragmatic thing to do, I guess, was to, yeah, OK, I need
Speaker:to create political accountability for what's happening. There needs to be something scarier
Speaker:than CJA. I keep thinking back to the discussion I had with Dimitri Lascaris, the most recent
Speaker:one, and I wanted to ask him about how he felt about international law now, because, I mean,
Speaker:even months into the genocide and various ICJ, ICC rulings, nothing had moved. Canadian-wise,
Speaker:globally is another discussion as well. But even after more rulings and more findings,
Speaker:we've revisited the discussion. And at first, he really thought there was a certain amount
Speaker:of pressure that the international community would be able to provide to Canadian politicians
Speaker:that would essentially force their hands. Like how long could you act in contravention of
Speaker:all of these statutes you've signed onto? And, you know. your obligations to the international
Speaker:community. And even if they didn't want to come along, they would have to. You could be successful
Speaker:in that realm. And although obviously we've seen arrest warrants now issued for Benjamin
Speaker:Netanyahu and others, and Trudeau promising he would arrest Netanyahu should he set foot
Speaker:on Canadian soil, Demetri kind of when he revisited it, he looked back and what he said was that
Speaker:he had underestimated I believe he used the word callousness of our politicians. They're,
Speaker:even here, you know, we espouse the theory of change that, you know, enough public pressure
Speaker:in various forms, all together, will make politicians move. They have to, right? They want to get
Speaker:reelected. But this has bucked that trend completely. We have to reevaluate our electoral systems
Speaker:when... No amount of street protests, petitions, inner disagreements within parties, bad press,
Speaker:international rulings, deaths, evidence. None of that has moved even the most progressive
Speaker:politicians in Canada. I think we have underestimated our ability to influence people within that
Speaker:electoral system. I think they have set themselves up for... So closely now, even our working
Speaker:class party, this professionalism Sean talks about includes the ability to people who work
Speaker:within the party to get hired after, to be appealing to capital after. Right? And so they're not
Speaker:listening to us at all anymore. At all. They are only listening to capital. And so when
Speaker:we, I'm scratching my head to think of something scarier than Cija. And I don't think people
Speaker:like my answer because it's not even just people in the streets. Like if you just took as many
Speaker:people into the streets as possible, just directed at the NDP saying, fuck you, hold the line,
Speaker:hold the goddamn ideological line, and you got every NDP member to call, email. I don't know
Speaker:if you'd move them. We don't know anymore. This threshold is unimaginable at this point because
Speaker:I would have thought turning on your Instagram account for like five minutes would be enough.
Speaker:to get you to refuse to participate in the next fucking house meeting unless Canada stops sending
Speaker:arms to Israel. When you do that, Sean, Sean quit because his friend got removed from a
Speaker:candidacy, but our politicians in there are sitting on their asses talking about a GST
Speaker:holiday for two months, bragging about it, and haven't done sweet fuck off for Palestine for
Speaker:a litany of other issues that people will cry about at convention. that are like so deeply
Speaker:personal and systemic and need addressing. And they've just ignored it because it's just not
Speaker:in their interest. And the NDP base is some of the worst. You want to know why? Not because
Speaker:they're bad people at all. These are my comrades. I love probably most of them. The ones that
Speaker:I don't they know who they are. But these are good people. But these are good people between
Speaker:a rock and a hard place. These are people who don't have, like if you're conservative and
Speaker:you just think, you know, Pierre Poliev is just a piece of shit and he's just not for you,
Speaker:you could probably hold your breath and vote liberal, not see, you know, materially you
Speaker:won't really see much of a difference, especially if you're in the majority here. Especially
Speaker:if you're in Nova Scotia, because this is one problem we have in Nova Scotia, is that there
Speaker:is so little daylight between the three political parties. For example, the ostensible conservative
Speaker:government right now just burned through two consecutive billion budget surpluses in 22
Speaker:and 23, and then in 24 posted a deficit budget. What's conservative about that? There's not
Speaker:like this isn't like the thing is the conservatives aren't meaningfully conservative. The the ostensibly
Speaker:leftist NDP aren't left. Like they're all offering some kind of tax breaks when we're running
Speaker:a deficit. Like it doesn't make any sense. It doesn't there's no like this is the thing like
Speaker:when we like I've been on the doorstep a bunch now. I try to stay away from it because there's
Speaker:other places I can be more useful. And what people say over and over again is when the
Speaker:NDP were in power here because they were there was an NDP government under Darryl Dexter here
Speaker:in Nova Scotia. More than a decade ago, he is we're just like the rest of them and they're
Speaker:not wrong. And this is the thing is that people don't come to the NDP when they want the status
Speaker:quo. They come to the NDP when they want change. So it's not good enough and it'll never be
Speaker:good enough for the Democrats to try and be a better research liberal part which is sort
Speaker:of what they are. It's a liberal party that wants to have an abortion clinic in Cape Breton
Speaker:now. We're in a liberal party that proclaims an endometriosis awareness day. You know what
Speaker:I mean? Those little incremental improvements are not going to be. And it's part of this,
Speaker:again, it's the whole business as usual thing. Like when you tell electoralists who are not
Speaker:voting, you just disappear in a pop of smoke to them. You know what I mean? So there's 50%
Speaker:of this province, because that's roughly what our election turnout rates are at right now
Speaker:is about 50%. In my own writing, it was 38% in the last provincial election that bothered
Speaker:voting. There's a whole political party, there's a whole super majority of people out there,
Speaker:like a majority of the potential electoral vote who want nothing to do with anything on offer,
Speaker:who don't want politics as usual. I'm with them. I'm one of those people. That's where I'm at
Speaker:now too. Like I don't like business as usual isn't going to cut it. And not even from, dare
Speaker:I say it, a pragmatic standpoint. This is the thing is like there's, you can, you can lay
Speaker:claim to pragmatism as I have done, but you have to show results or it's a hollow claim.
Speaker:You know what I mean? You have to show that you've done something that couldn't have been
Speaker:done otherwise. It's also sometimes to legitimize your work too. Like the system forces you,
Speaker:did you check those boxes? Did you try everything legitimate first? Cause then I'll authorize
Speaker:you to step it up. then you can look to a third way when you've proven. But here, we try to
Speaker:advocate for people to just try those third ways first. Because in the end, they end up,
Speaker:you have to apply, like Sean says, you have NDP in power, you got liberals, conservatives,
Speaker:whoever they are, you still have to go at them from the same way once they're in power, right?
Speaker:You still have to approach them from whatever kind of way, whether it be pragmatic or radical,
Speaker:and to get stuff done. But before we wrap up, I just I do want to make one more point about
Speaker:the NDP base again, who like I'm not trying to demonize this. The point of this is to demonstrate
Speaker:just how they do moderate us, like how they pull us in with these promises and their theories
Speaker:of change that they pretend to advocate for. And they sometimes use the language we need
Speaker:to hear. But when it really counts, when they're talking outward. when they're talking to the
Speaker:public, they actually use the language of capital in the right wing quite a lot. Means testing
Speaker:and everything except a GST. My point is the base there becomes the most ineffective base
Speaker:also because they often refuse to hold the powerful to account. For the same reason they don't
Speaker:leave the party is because they're afraid of the alternatives. They aren't going to go to
Speaker:the Liberal Party or the Conservatives, so they don't want to burn down the NDP. Even most
Speaker:people who leave don't leave like Sean. They just quietly take their memberships away so
Speaker:that they can balance internally with their morals. They know that they're not actually
Speaker:financially contributing to this. They might get their vote. They might hold their nose
Speaker:and vote because, again, they don't want to vote Liberal and they don't want to vote Conservative
Speaker:and there's no good independence on the ballot, perhaps. Whatever. But they are so... Empowered
Speaker:Lee within the system for the most part and I have been in there I don't care how many
Speaker:examples of people you can give me like Sean or myself There are many that were very vocal
Speaker:all the time I mean, there's some of us that enter spaces like that and there's nothing
Speaker:we can't do but rail against it I'm talking mostly to my neurodivergent comrades, you know,
Speaker:like you will smell it right away the authoritarianism It'll just you'll get the tingles right away
Speaker:and you will you will fight back I know you will but you will be alone for the most part
Speaker:Sean was not followed by a flood of people saying they had also ripped up their membership or
Speaker:Made a stitch video saying me too The other writings in candidates they may have lost momentum,
Speaker:but they did an issue statements. They also did not stand behind her Tammy is probably
Speaker:feeling very alone right now All these people that talked about a big progressive family
Speaker:are now trying to distance themselves from her as much as possible, even though privately
Speaker:they will express dismay and disappointment. Publicly, they won't say shit. Even in provincial
Speaker:council, it's very rare someone stands up and sticks their necks out and worries about whether
Speaker:or not they'll be asked to be a candidate or asked to work on this campaign or be a favourite,
Speaker:because it will come with a lot of slack. Because every time you talk shit about the NDP online,
Speaker:in person, the response is, what do you want the conservatives to win? What do you want?
Speaker:You think the liberals are better? It's like this really black and white dichotomy. If you
Speaker:follow American politics, it's a familiar refrain, right? Like the, what, you know, if you criticize
Speaker:Kamala Harris, you're a Trump supporter, right? And it's the same way. But in the same way
Speaker:that like, this is the thing about these electoralists and their ostensibly expertise is that I don't
Speaker:think they were paying attention to this most recent American election. Or they're listening
Speaker:to the pundits who are ignoring the elephant in the room, because none of these pundits
Speaker:will talk about the fact that 14 million people who voted for Joe Biden declined to vote for
Speaker:Kamala Harris. Like there was no big shift of support from the Democrats to the Republicans.
Speaker:Both of them lost net voters, just the Republicans lost fewer. They lost three million, whereas
Speaker:the Democrats lost 14 million. And so this is the thing, like I... And it's one of the things
Speaker:that worries me about trying to have, you know, in doing what I did in making it loud and messy
Speaker:and making it clear what happened to me and clear with the membership and with people in
Speaker:my life who trust me and who trusted my trust of the party. Cause like I said, the pundits
Speaker:aren't getting it right. The people who are, you know, you're looking to on the news, all
Speaker:the, all the former party hacks who became public relations, you know, the heads of public relation
Speaker:firms or whatever. I mean, and that's nearly all that describes basically every pundit that
Speaker:you'll see on CBC or CTV. They're all, I used to be in the party and now I'm like a. Now
Speaker:I'm with Navigator or something. You know what I mean? That's the career path. And you're
Speaker:right to acknowledge that in terms of that's what some people are thinking about is, where
Speaker:do I land from here? And that applies to politicians, too. There's all kinds of politicians that
Speaker:are thinking about what kind of cushy private sector job am I going to land in once my term
Speaker:is over and once I've got my pension nailed down. But yeah, it does give me pause to think
Speaker:about if they don't understand that Palestine just cost them that election. That's the thing.
Speaker:Does it matter? to that Palestine cost them of the election if they don't realize it and
Speaker:no one acknowledges it. I don't know. I don't know if they if it that's what worries me.
Speaker:But this is like, yes, like I see a ton of people like withdrawing their support. It's not just
Speaker:the party faithful. Its voters are infuriated like they've been they've been close to this
Speaker:issue. They were hoping for leadership on it from their party and they're being really disappointed
Speaker:and don't know who to vote for. So I do think that people are reacting. I think there are
Speaker:a lot of people on the base who are really mad and who are pushing back. But I just, that's
Speaker:what concerns me is the sort of, it can be very difficult to convince somebody of something
Speaker:if their profession depends on them not understanding it, as has been said. So. I mean, I think you
Speaker:wouldn't have to use the word, I think people are really pushing back because. My perception
Speaker:is they're pushing back because that's what I'm seeing on my, like in the just voluminous
Speaker:comments on my, because like a 30,000 view TikTok, like Nova Scotia provincial TikTok is not a
Speaker:thing. Like that's not a thing that happens. Like so. Watching and resonating and understanding
Speaker:is one thing, but then taking the initiative to actually hold them accountable is another.
Speaker:So I think that yeah, a lot what you're going to see is this quiet withdrawal, this quiet
Speaker:withdrawal of labor and volunteerism, this quiet withdrawal of people maybe thinking about being
Speaker:a candidate for them the next time. I know this has happened so many times over. I cannot believe
Speaker:people still sign up to be candidates. When my friends do it still. I try not to pass judgment,
Speaker:but obviously I am right now, but it's like, why are you expecting anything different? Because
Speaker:it's you? Because you know more people? Because they wouldn't do that to you? My friends, they
Speaker:did it to Sarah Jama, and you need to see the numbers she won in Hamilton and the strength
Speaker:of support that the Ontario NDP gets in Hamilton and relies on in Hamilton, and they did not
Speaker:give a fuck. Not two shits. They did not relent at all. Many, many people resigned from the
Speaker:Ontario NDP. Many people are volunteering now for Sarah Jemma that would have put their labor
Speaker:into the NDP and refused to. But they still go online and brag about how their donations
Speaker:are up. And they did not issue any apology. They did not bring her back into the caucus.
Speaker:They didn't even humor the idea. They keep humiliating her by not standing next to her when she wore
Speaker:the kaffir or anything like that. And so it really goes- Just to my point here that it's
Speaker:like you can do these things and I'm happy you resigned and I hope more people are pushing
Speaker:back. But if you're still going to give them donations and you're still going to just give
Speaker:them a vote and not try to hold them accountable in any way, they're going to keep repeating
Speaker:this behavior because it's working for them. I mean if you're still funding headquarters
Speaker:then what prerogative do they have for change because their values aren't it?
Speaker:Yeah, and So I know that there's a there's a cost. I know that there is a political and
Speaker:logistic cost to what happened that would probably not have existed if I hadn't done what I did.
Speaker:So like, I don't know, I think there's all kinds of ways to have an effect inside and outside
Speaker:politics. I think that you are more powerful in the Nova Scotia NDP as a disaffected liberal
Speaker:voter than you are as a loyal Democrat. Yeah, there's all kinds of ways to engage with the
Speaker:system. I think, I feel a certain obligation. I think I've said this previously. Like I feel
Speaker:obliged to do something with the political system that I ostensibly, by virtue of demographics,
Speaker:have some kind of enhanced access to the levers of. That is a fair assessment. I mean, you
Speaker:said it, I didn't. But I mean, when you spoke about being heard and felt like you were listened
Speaker:to, your time in the party is one thing, but surely your demographics also help as being
Speaker:a white male inside the party. But in the end, if you push back hard enough, your persona
Speaker:non grata, essentially, or you leave on your own accord. That was sort of the only morally
Speaker:and morally tenable position for me was to do what I did. Like I made an honest try. I tried
Speaker:to push the needle. I think I got some people in the party thinking differently and I got
Speaker:people in the party coming up and thinking differently to me. But in the end, can I make the leadership
Speaker:do things? No, it's true. And no, I tried to put all the information in front of them. I
Speaker:tried to even give the leader some runway because I didn't name the leader when I made my videos.
Speaker:Were you being pragmatic? I was. I was absolutely being pragmatic. I was trying, okay, well,
Speaker:let's give the leader a little bit of runway to get in front of this and like you can reverse
Speaker:course and Halifax knows this is the thing is that this is a very, like there, there's like
Speaker:South Shore for ceasefire and there was like an antagonist for Gaza organization, but by
Speaker:and large, when you're talking about people who are organized on the issue of Palestine,
Speaker:you're talking about HRM, which is the base of power for the Nova Scotia NDP. Very, very
Speaker:urban party as it is in so many other places. So this strikes right at the heart of their
Speaker:power. How I don't know if it's if it's changed their outcome, but I want them to come away
Speaker:from this realizing that they miss or like thinking that they miscalculated and or knowing they
Speaker:miscalculated and that they That people want more about you know from them their supporters
Speaker:want more from them on this issue. Maybe the conservatives and liberal supporters don't
Speaker:But, but that's what that's what the base wants and there's going to be a lot of hardship if
Speaker:you if you show cowardice and capitulate to see Joe Well, let's hope Jagmeet is watching.
Speaker:Surely Kamala learned this lesson the hard way, or maybe she didn't, who knows? But thank you,
Speaker:Sean. Thanks, Jess, I appreciate it. That is a wrap on another episode of Blueprints of
Speaker:Disruption. Thank you for joining us. If you'd like to help us continue disrupting the status
Speaker:quo, please share our content. And if you have the means, consider becoming a patron. So until
Speaker:next time, keep disrupting.