Speaker:

to Blueprints of Disruption, a podcast dedicated to amplifying the grassroots. I'm your host,

Speaker:

Jess McLean. As most of you might know, the NDP is currently without a leader. One could

Speaker:

argue they've been without one for years, but that's a different episode altogether, one

Speaker:

we've probably done here on Blueprints. Let's be honest, it's no secret there's no love lost

Speaker:

between me and the NDP, but That didn't dampen my interest in speaking with our next guest

Speaker:

about their recent announcement that they would be running for leader of the party. Yvonne

Speaker:

Glare, journalist, author, and activist is no stranger to politics, but if he's approved,

Speaker:

and that is a big if, this will be new territory for him. To describe him as an unconventional

Speaker:

politician would be an understatement. The very reasons that have made Eve a great guest on

Speaker:

our show are the very things the NDP has tried to distance themselves from. As you'll hear,

Speaker:

he's not naive to this at all, nor does he seem daunted by the impending shit show that has

Speaker:

accompanied NDP leadership races of late. He makes clear his intentions behind running.

Speaker:

There are a handful of issues really at the core of his campaign, and if nothing else,

Speaker:

he feels he can make an impact on those. If you've been listening to the show lately, you'll

Speaker:

hear similarities between Yves' goals and those of, say, the Revolution Party of Canada, who

Speaker:

we interviewed a few weeks ago. People just doing whatever they can to widen the political

Speaker:

spectrum that is Canadian politics from within. As we've said before, We'll never know which

Speaker:

tactics will work until we try them. We'll never know what pressures will lead to the final

Speaker:

break. But we do know that we've got to do whatever we can. We platform all kinds of activists,

Speaker:

organizers, journalists, and I guess now even the odd politician, so that you can draw from

Speaker:

whatever lessons you need to, to choose or maybe change your path of resistance. Our hope is

Speaker:

that you simply just keep resisting. and maybe share our content so we can reach more folks.

Speaker:

Now let's get to what you tuned in for. Okay, Yvonne Glor is back in the studio. I've lost

Speaker:

track of how many times you've joined us at Blueprints. I am so excited to discuss this

Speaker:

with you. Normally I lean on all your expertise, foreign policy, we've had you on to talk about

Speaker:

the pressures you're creating around Palestine and our politicians. And now... We have Yvonne

Speaker:

to talk about his recent announcement that he will run for leader of the NDP. I think one

Speaker:

of the replies I had on Twitter there was, holy crap. And lots of questions came pouring in

Speaker:

because a lot of people are like in this gray zone of can I ever vote for the NDP again?

Speaker:

And then they see you. And I think, you know, some people I never thought I would see talking

Speaker:

about taking out a membership are asking, you how can they volunteer for this campaign? So

Speaker:

you have definitely stirred the hornets' nest, Yves. What made you decide to do this now?

Speaker:

Well, basically I was asked by the Socialist Caucus. I'll be honest with you, it wasn't

Speaker:

on my radar whatsoever until I was asked, what is it, about a month ago, six weeks ago, about

Speaker:

representing or being the candidate of the Socialist Caucus. And my initial reaction was...

Speaker:

This wasn't on my radar. It's not, it's, you know, I'm doing lots of stuff. Yeah, I was

Speaker:

gonna say you must be busy. I have two young children. You know, there's obviously more

Speaker:

than enough work, just, you know, full time doing combat or challenging Canada's complicity

Speaker:

in the genocide in Gaza, right? but then I, when I started thinking about bit more, there's

Speaker:

like, there's kind of two issues that I think that I'm, I guess, uniquely placed to raise

Speaker:

that are really present. Now, obviously Canada's support for the Holocaust in Gaza is something

Speaker:

I've been doing lots of stuff on over the past 20 months. you the NDP has gotten a little

Speaker:

bit better on that issue. But in fact, if you actually sort of understand the issue fully,

Speaker:

they're still actually not very good on that issue. so there's, I think, need to push

Speaker:

further on that issue in general, then specifically even in NDP circles. But it's actually not

Speaker:

that issue that I would say is the one that really sort of crystallized, kind of saying,

Speaker:

hey, you know what, I should do this. It's the military spending issue. This is unprecedented

Speaker:

how much increased military spending since World War II that Carney has committed to

Speaker:

just, I mean, it's a trillion dollars over the next decade. The best case scenario is it's

Speaker:

just, you know, leads to slashing of social programs. It leads to boosting this authoritarian,

Speaker:

racist, patriarchal institution. That's the best case scenario. The worst case scenario

Speaker:

is that, as we've seen with these like, you know, monsters who've been enabling the genocide

Speaker:

in Gaza, that it gives them greater means, be it Carney, be it Poliev, be it other

Speaker:

future prime ministers or whatever, to unleash violence globally. So that's what we're doing.

Speaker:

We're putting this incredible amount of resources into the military. And the NDP can't respond

Speaker:

to this really. I mean, they put out a statement, it's actually hilarious. I guess it's about

Speaker:

a week ago, 10 days ago, Yeah, funny not funny. About the 5 % of GDP on the military. And

Speaker:

the statement headline, I don't have it right in front of me, it's NDP says no to 5 % GDP

Speaker:

on the military, which that would be good. That's good. But then the first 11 lines of

Speaker:

the statement are pro-military. And then even saying that we, they criticize the liberals

Speaker:

and the conservatives for not having followed NATO commitments in the past. they're sort

Speaker:

of implying that like if we was an NEP, we would have hit the 2 % of GDP, the previous NATO

Speaker:

target of 2%, but they're not really saying that directly. But you could also read it saying

Speaker:

that totally contradicting the headline, which noted the 5 % NATO target. And so a totally

Speaker:

contradictory statement. Some of it's okay-ish and some of it's just horrible. They campaigned

Speaker:

on increasing military spending, right? And didn't get much blowback from anyone. That

Speaker:

was tough to hear all three, sorry, four candidates really talk about increasing military spending,

Speaker:

RCMP spending, and strengthening the border, which gave so much space for Carney to do this

Speaker:

after, right? He doesn't just have a mandate from conservatives, he pretty much got a green

Speaker:

light from the progressive wing of Canadian politics as well during the campaign. So I

Speaker:

get you being skeptical on the NDP being able to be any force of opposition on this matter?

Speaker:

I think basically the picture is they box themselves in by supporting the NATO, specifically NATO

Speaker:

proxy war in Ukraine, but supporting a pro-Washington foreign policy from China to Iran. Even the

Speaker:

recent statements in Iran were a little bit less bad than all the stuff Heather McPherson's

Speaker:

been doing for many years. And what I see coming here is that over the next couple months,

Speaker:

we're going to start seeing Public Service Alliance of Canada, CUPE, Council of Canadians, other

Speaker:

kind of more mainstreamy left organizations start realizing that wow, this NATO thing is

Speaker:

actually quite a threat to us. It's not that NATO's a threat to people all around the world,

Speaker:

which has long been and the NDP's put all this work, but that there's actually started realizing

Speaker:

that this is gonna be a threat to Canadian social programs. And we're talking about a major transfer

Speaker:

from social entitlements And the Global Mail editorial board and Carney's even starting

Speaker:

to talk about this stuff to the military machine. I'm honest about what I know and I'm honest

Speaker:

about what I don't know. I don't think there's anyone else as well placed with the knowledge

Speaker:

and the credibility on those two issues to hammer away at Canada's complicity in the genocide

Speaker:

in Gaza and the military question, which are obviously somewhat interrelated as well. But

Speaker:

so that, yeah, so that's what kind of pushed me forward to finally say, yeah, I'll do this.

Speaker:

I only became an NDP member a few weeks ago when I started thinking about this. had been

Speaker:

an NDP member in the past. I have voted for the NDP in the past. It's always, well, maybe

Speaker:

not always, maybe the first time I voted for the NDP it wasn't, but in recent decades or

Speaker:

recent years, it's not with any illusions about what the NDP is. I see the realistic success

Speaker:

here. is using this space to push the debate away from sort of the mushy middle towards

Speaker:

bringing forward stuff about anti-capitalism, eco-socialism, about decolonization, land

Speaker:

back, about these kind of issues. But principally, on the on the Palestine Gaza question and and

Speaker:

the military spending. hear you on those two policies and I get why they're prioritized.

Speaker:

The problem with the NDP as you know, so this is and the audience knows I'm just repeating

Speaker:

it for the question sake goes the problem goes well beyond some of their bad takes on on policies.

Speaker:

It goes to how it's structured and their hostility towards frankly people like you. And me, right?

Speaker:

So like we've seen so many examples of like Sarah Jam is probably the most notable, it's

Speaker:

freshest in most people's minds, but we've seen, you know, other attempts at having, I

Speaker:

would consider you a grassroots candidate, right? Everything everyone was hoping for, because

Speaker:

nobody trusts any of the politicians in general right now, especially people who have been

Speaker:

advocating for Palestine. We've been so let down that I think finding somebody from outside

Speaker:

of those circles is a smart idea. But do have any idea on what you would tell people that

Speaker:

are asking about the way that party is run and the way that it has suppressed voices like

Speaker:

yours in the past? Democratization is a word that some people are using or the decentralization,

Speaker:

a deferring back to members as opposed to the consultant class that's currently running the

Speaker:

party. Yeah, no, mean, I obviously agree that that it's there's a obviously there's a major

Speaker:

contradiction between sort of suggesting you're a party of social movements of of activism

Speaker:

and this stuff and then being clearly quite hostile to social movements and activism and

Speaker:

you know, in the really egregious examples of Sarah Jama, you know, really in front of your

Speaker:

face, but there's there's, how many candidates over the past decade have been blocked from

Speaker:

running, even some cases being nominated by writing associations and then being blocked

Speaker:

from representing because they had criticized Israel. So that was the question that was

Speaker:

asked. The Toronto Star reporter today at the press conference asked, you expect them

Speaker:

to block your candidacy? Obviously they did that flagrantly and with... Angela in BC, was

Speaker:

that two or three years ago, when she looked like she was going to win the BC NDP leadership.

Speaker:

I Mr. Presser, what did you say? I said I they shouldn't. They shouldn't block it if they

Speaker:

if they believe that they if they believe that this this is that they you know, that we have

Speaker:

democracy in the party and they want to, you enlarge the tent and stuff like that. And they

Speaker:

supposed to speak tied to social movements and the like that they should they should. you

Speaker:

know, members vote against, know, fine, good, whatever, right? I really don't know. mean,

Speaker:

talking to people at the Socialist Caucus about how are they gonna block you? think there's,

Speaker:

obviously setting up the intelligent way of blocking is to have a high entrance fee.

Speaker:

So you just try to exclude people who are not from the sort of party establishment by charging

Speaker:

$100,000 or whatever to, know, you have to raise that kind of money. That's the sort of smart

Speaker:

way. We have already seen quickly the pro-Israel forces, the extremist pro-Israel forces are

Speaker:

going completely losing themselves online about this. I don't expect there's obviously, if

Speaker:

this gets any traction, there's going to be a huge push from pro-Israel forces to have

Speaker:

me barred from running. And obviously within the NDP leadership, they don't want me to

Speaker:

run. So there would be two different forces there, obvious forces that would just want

Speaker:

to stop this. Apparently yesterday at the council brought forward a plan for the leadership race

Speaker:

and it was rejected, 55-45, which is according to a socialist caucus, that's kind of an unprecedented

Speaker:

opposition. So there's clearly divisions within the hierarchy of the NDP. I don't know how

Speaker:

that impacts their response and their ability even to bar me from running. But yeah, I'm

Speaker:

going to proceed as if the campaign is happening, that they'll have whatever financial bars

Speaker:

to try to exclude. But we'll deal with that question when we know what the specifics are.

Speaker:

yeah, it's obviously... the lack of democracy within the party is fundamental. don't think

Speaker:

it is just a party problem. I think it is a much more broad problem in our society and

Speaker:

political culture in terms of we don't have structures in place designed to enable participation

Speaker:

and we don't want, all structures are a society, to tell people not to go to demonstrations,

Speaker:

tell people not to have empathy with others, not to... pay attention to issues and leave

Speaker:

it in the hands of the quote unquote experts or the quote unquote bosses or whatnot. So

Speaker:

I think it's a much deeper issue and it gets to the whole question. And this is one thing,

Speaker:

obviously the foreign policy issues are what I have focused my time and energy on in last

Speaker:

decade. But I do also really believe that we need to replace capitalism with economic democracy.

Speaker:

We need to have not just democracy in the so-called political arena, but it has to be throughout

Speaker:

the economic arena. And we need to be pushing those ideas. those ideas are, should be, there

Speaker:

should be a debate about that within left circles, within NDP circles. And I don't want anyone

Speaker:

to... take my candidacy, I don't know why anyone would, but to take my candidacy as some sort

Speaker:

of like endorsement of the NDP as some sort of, you know, progressive institution. I do

Speaker:

have to say on the notion of like, a lot of people talk about setting up a new party. I

Speaker:

was in Oslo about six weeks ago, and there's this new left-wing party that was established

Speaker:

because all the parties, the former left-wing parties, had supported the NATO proxy war.

Speaker:

And it was basically set up and they finally got the number of registrations, took like

Speaker:

six months, a year to get the number of registrations to become a formal party. the other left-wing

Speaker:

parties supported the NATO proxy war and some had left the party. And they were all excited

Speaker:

when they there. They just had some big success with this ad campaign about putting money,

Speaker:

instead of putting money more into the NATO proxy war. put it into social programs. But

Speaker:

their goal, they have a serious proportional representation model in Norway. And their goal

Speaker:

was still to get one elected. hope, you know, maybe a bit more, but really was to get one

Speaker:

person elected. So that's with a proper proportional representation system. We don't have that.

Speaker:

So I don't see, I don't see that alternative. Like, let's set up another, you know, anti-NATO

Speaker:

party, which people like, you know, raised to me or anti-capitalist anti-NATO party. It's

Speaker:

just the possibility of electoral success is, least in the medium term, virtually nil.

Speaker:

I don't really see that model. I haven't spent time working through NDP structures. I haven't

Speaker:

done that. I have. So we're going to go back. But I do basically agree with the Socialist

Speaker:

Caucus, or as I understand it, Socialist Caucus' position on this, which is that It exists

Speaker:

as an institution, it's an avenue of political struggle, it's got major problems, but what's

Speaker:

the alternative in terms of the party structure? I don't really see that. So that's something

Speaker:

I've considered for long time. And like I said, when I was in Norway and talking to some people,

Speaker:

even again with this deep proportional representation system they have, their hope was just one

Speaker:

elected official. And so I don't see any shot at that in the shorter medium term with

Speaker:

the alternative left party in Canada. think most people would understand that. I even interviewed

Speaker:

the Revolution Party of Canada. So they fed up with what was available to them, did start

Speaker:

a new party, but, you know, they described it as a bit of chaos. They're not even registered

Speaker:

yet. So like there is a lot of growing pains involved and that is again without electoral

Speaker:

reform. I get that. I get that. I do want to go back to because you covered a lot Eve. So

Speaker:

I'm going to like kind of we'll unpack it a little bit together. You name dropped Heather

Speaker:

McPherson there just briefly. We were talking about foreign policy and that is her jam. Right.

Speaker:

And but you know she was given that high profile position for a reason. She is the anointed

Speaker:

one. Right. It's not official but that's what I'm telling you. She's the one that they want.

Speaker:

And when I say they, always, I'm kind of referring to Central to the consultant and Lucy Watson

Speaker:

is the national director. So she gets to vet all candidates for leadership. She did that

Speaker:

with the Ontario NDP. And although a lot of people don't know about it, it ended up like

Speaker:

the DC NDP leadership race as well. So a lot of folks weren't openly rejected, publicly

Speaker:

rejected. but they were given such a hard time by Lucy Watson and shifting goal posts and

Speaker:

discouragement from within the establishment. mean, like that doesn't impact you as much

Speaker:

as it would an existing MPP who needs to kind of still get along, right? You could totally

Speaker:

go in there and blow the doors open. various pressures were put on people until they all

Speaker:

dropped out or were told they couldn't qualify. And that's like, there's one key holder there

Speaker:

and she's moved to the federal party. You know, this is the same person who kicked me out for

Speaker:

allegedly harassing people online, so like, holding people accountable. Eve, I don't

Speaker:

even come close to touching your level of holding people accountable. We won't call it

Speaker:

harassment because there's things attached to that, but... And also for anti-Semitism

Speaker:

because I used a cartoon... that had previously been used in a meme that was anti-Semitic.

Speaker:

The language had all been changed, but it was centered around me running for party president.

Speaker:

And so every tool at their disposal came out to disqualify anybody, not just me, but anybody

Speaker:

who was a threat to their standing order. I'm telling you, they will do everything and anything

Speaker:

possible to block you. Most people don't have lawyers at their disposal to kind of challenge

Speaker:

it because they often don't even go with their own constitution. I like to see federal council

Speaker:

pushing back. That is unusual. is Socialist Caucuses, right? That's very unusual. That's

Speaker:

a sign that folks are trying to push through leadership rules that will limit participation

Speaker:

and members are pushing back against it, right? Right now it's like a pretty low threshold

Speaker:

for fundraising, but they want to raise that. Like they vocally set placed seeds in the

Speaker:

media, right, that they want that increase. Another tool that they might use is they've

Speaker:

got Nathan Cullen talking to the media and he's saying that the NDP doesn't have time

Speaker:

for a leadership race. This party that is in demise, in freefall, they don't think that

Speaker:

there's time for a race. You want to comment on that? Because that's like the latest kind

Speaker:

of maybe delay tactic that they'll sit with Dawn as long as possible or really challenge

Speaker:

their constitution and actually appoint somebody. what do you say to Nathan Cullen who says

Speaker:

there's no time for an NDP leadership race right now? Well, that seems pretty absurd.

Speaker:

mean, you'd think you'd want to try to rejuvenate the party and rejuvenate grassroots participation.

Speaker:

But they seem to be kind of failing on that because they're also not able to force through

Speaker:

their rules on leadership race. It's just the time is kind of moving forward and the

Speaker:

strategy there, of course, is to keep it in the hands of the consultant class and the

Speaker:

anointed one, Heather McPherson. I'll say that with regards to Heather McPherson, I I

Speaker:

plan to be, I really go out hard on her. She's on the NATO Parliamentary Association of Canada.

Speaker:

She's one of two NDP MPs there, which is pretty egregious. Jean Chrétien takes a more progressive

Speaker:

position on NATO's role in Ukraine than she does. in terms of whether they'll block me,

Speaker:

don't... I mean, I'll be honest, I didn't want to say that at the press conference because

Speaker:

you don't want to give them the out. I expect to be blocked, of course, but how that will

Speaker:

play itself out and if there's enough dissent within... the establishment, appears to be

Speaker:

right now, maybe, you know, how do you even, who would even make the decision right now

Speaker:

to block me before there's an actual formal race taking place? So I see a scenario where

Speaker:

the really extremist anti-Palestinians whip themselves up into such a frenzy. Like there's

Speaker:

people out on Twitter saying that the NDP should be a banned terrorist organization if I became

Speaker:

the leader. And so they're whipping themselves up and then that even forces the more kind

Speaker:

of mainstream and maybe a bit more sober minded Cija to come out and start demanding that

Speaker:

I'm barred from running. But who makes that decision before there's actual race? I don't

Speaker:

know. They can't. You have to submit a vetting package. They'll design a package for you to

Speaker:

fill out once the rules are set. And then that's the only time they could. One trick they might...

Speaker:

try is your relatively new membership. So an amendment that required somebody have months

Speaker:

of a membership to qualify or worse, you know, like it might sound like a flippant amendment

Speaker:

that nobody really challenges, but it would be directly to block you or criteria on

Speaker:

Internet language, honest to God, the amount of monitoring that they've done of their own

Speaker:

members is astonishing. So their idea of harassment is basically using really tough language with

Speaker:

people in power. So I imagine like be prepared to go on those fronts, but I'm happy to see

Speaker:

this play out in the public either way. Like, I'm sorry if they put you through hell, Eve.

Speaker:

I appreciate that you're expecting it. And I don't think you're going to be terribly

Speaker:

daunted by it, but how they handle you will, I think, demonstrate to members exactly what's

Speaker:

going on behind the scenes of the federal party. We've not had a leadership race in a while,

Speaker:

and even the last one was controversial, had issues surrounding it. So yeah, there's definitely

Speaker:

no argument they need rejuvenation, and this could do it. Yeah, I'm going to be totally,

Speaker:

I'm not going to, I'm going put everything that happens will be totally in the public. you

Speaker:

know, they come up with, I'm not going to like, you know, there's no backroom deal that I'm,

Speaker:

that I'm, uh, I don't have some, um, the leverage over me. I mean, the leverage to block me running

Speaker:

obviously is significant, but their leverage in other ways is, you know, I'm not in a position

Speaker:

that, that, so I'll be completely open and frank with everyone about, about, uh, about this.

Speaker:

And, and obviously. The aim is a one in a million shot at winning. the major failure is not

Speaker:

being able to stop the killing in Gaza. But in some ways, I think we've done a fairly

Speaker:

poor job of politicizing the popular uprising against Canada's complicity in the wars in

Speaker:

Gaza. We haven't really, I think probably there's lots of people who now are more critical

Speaker:

of Canadian foreign policy, but I don't know that we've done a very good job of broadening

Speaker:

the challenge to the status quo, broadening the challenge to imperialism, broadening the

Speaker:

challenge to capitalism. And I don't know that, and I'd say that even for myself, I have

Speaker:

mostly just focused on Canada's complicity and Gaza. I've obviously written about other issues

Speaker:

and talked about other issues and gone to demos about other issues. But a lot of it has been

Speaker:

pretty narrow. And in fact, in launching this, I've kind of gone back to back to, like, putting

Speaker:

forward that we need to get, we need an alternative to capitalism. We need economic democracy.

Speaker:

We need challenges, radical decolonization and sort of broadening. And so I would hope

Speaker:

if there is ability to have this campaign move forward, maybe that can play some small

Speaker:

role in taking people who've been appalled, who've taken action on Gaza, also to get maybe

Speaker:

broaden their questioning of most obviously, foreign policy, but also imperialism and capitalism.

Speaker:

that can be, hopefully would be a contribute in some way potentially to that kind of broadening.

Speaker:

Yeah, I think had the NDP from the beginning been on point where their members stood, right,

Speaker:

like which had been clear in a previous vote at convention and worked with the movement

Speaker:

rather than essentially distancing themselves from it at the beginning, right? Like Jagmeet

Speaker:

was all over calling the Mount Sinai, the march past Mount Sinai anti-Semitic and progressive

Speaker:

politicians, yeah, almost were trying to play that center road the entire time and still

Speaker:

are, right? That most of the language is centered around ceasefire, not an end to the occupation.

Speaker:

And there's no talk of Palestinian resistance being legitimate. And there's lots of boundaries

Speaker:

they didn't bother pushing when they would have been the only ones to push it. I have no doubt

Speaker:

that would have helped popularize it, right? Because the ideas have social movements work

Speaker:

alongside political movements. and labor would have helped. There's, like, I know your focus

Speaker:

is on maybe economics and foreign policy, but when I asked, when I told folks I was going

Speaker:

to sit down with you and that they might have questions for you, many folks have been terribly

Speaker:

disappointed with the NDP's policy on disability rights and disability support. and frankly

Speaker:

disabled people in general. I mean, terrible. And I think like a lot of social movements

Speaker:

and labor movements have really left disabled people out of it. Like it's almost like the

Speaker:

non-entity, like they just see it as some marginalized group to create a policy around and not one

Speaker:

to engage politically. Can you speak to how you would possibly do that different and how,

Speaker:

I mean like, one of the examples is the UN has been very clear that we are beyond horrible

Speaker:

to disabled people. Like we are practicing a form of eugenics, we're offering maid, are

Speaker:

like disability supports our legislated poverty. And the progressive wing of Canadian politics

Speaker:

has really not taken up this cause at all. I mean, I think, you know, I I would fall into

Speaker:

what you're saying in terms of it's not, I'll be honest, it's not an issue that I've been

Speaker:

thinking about much or engaged with, active with. There are many different issues I've

Speaker:

been, know, go to demonstrations around and stuff like that. This isn't one. you know,

Speaker:

obviously with regards to the maid question, I support the notion of medical assisted

Speaker:

dying. I know that there is a whole, things have got to the point where there's talk about

Speaker:

basically being eugenics against disabled people because, and even the UN has criticized Canada

Speaker:

on that front. And the obvious side of the social entitlement side of, if people don't

Speaker:

have the means to survive, then life becomes really miserable and then there's... people

Speaker:

who may want to turn to maid. And so it becomes this sort of this, the, I would say progressive

Speaker:

side of the having people have the ability or the autonomy to make that request to die

Speaker:

then meshes with sort of neoliberalism and a way to not provide what people need. And

Speaker:

obviously what people need goes beyond just like, okay, well, you need a house, you need

Speaker:

a place to live, groceries and all that stuff, but also you need in-care... Supports, right?

Speaker:

Various supports. It's actually more expensive to be disabled. Like any disabled person can

Speaker:

tell you. Your glasses are just one example. that most people wouldn't think of. So the

Speaker:

plan here is as we move forward with the campaign is to have a detailed policy. I am a policy

Speaker:

type of person. There are areas where I've gotten... That might be fun for you. It's a

Speaker:

break from your usual gig. So the idea here is to actually have very detailed policies

Speaker:

on these issues. And obviously the way is to turn to those who've been campaigning and

Speaker:

the... the social movements that have been articulating the policies and trying to basically

Speaker:

adopt theirs or amplify theirs or how to frame it. And that goes with a lot of domestic

Speaker:

issues, I followed a little bit, but I'm not an expert. And my inclination is also not

Speaker:

to, it's not about platitudes or about just sort of talking points. do want to get like

Speaker:

really sort of detailed kind of thinking on different specific issues. I'm not in a position

Speaker:

right now to be... I'm grilling you on policy items and you just announced your candidacy.

Speaker:

It's fair enough. Fair, fair. It's like I said before, people are really excited and

Speaker:

I'll be honest, I'm excited because I want to see it and I want to report on it. I'm just

Speaker:

going totally open book. I want to see what they're going to do and I want to be able

Speaker:

to help boost it, right? Because I think it will demonstrate to people, honestly, the

Speaker:

futility of the establishment. I think I'm worried that in this moment here, folks are

Speaker:

going to start signing up to be members and they're going to get hurt again, right? Like

Speaker:

they idolize you in a way. Like I don't want to say that in it. I know that probably makes

Speaker:

you feel uncomfortable and it might even make some audience members feel uncomfortable. Like

Speaker:

I don't mean it in this unquestionable, uncritical way, but it's like we're looking for hope in

Speaker:

anywhere right now. And Canadian politics is so void of it. And when I talk about disabled

Speaker:

people, that's one group in particular where like getting out of legislative poverty is

Speaker:

like only going to seems to be happening by policy, right? There's mutual aid that can

Speaker:

happen, but quite literally they like live or die off of the government being in power that

Speaker:

can save them. Okay, like it sounds paternalistic but and there's so many others right that

Speaker:

have been going to politicians for years and have lost all hope. But what if they see it

Speaker:

in you, they take out all kinds of memberships, they invest themselves in this party and

Speaker:

it doesn't work out. Will you encourage those folks to stay in the party or? Like, you still

Speaker:

think, do you think there's room for reform beyond, you know, you as a leader? Some people

Speaker:

might not. I'm a little bit of a less bad person in politics. I've said this many times, like

Speaker:

I'm prepared to vote to defeat people in writings, right? If I was in like, I don't know, if

Speaker:

there was a close race and I was in a Poliev writing and it was only the liberal could defeat,

Speaker:

might make that vote. I don't happen to be in that. I happen to be in a rioting where it's

Speaker:

the other way around, it's, you know, I vote, last election I voted for the NDP against Guilbault

Speaker:

and I previously voted for a far left party and, whatever, Communist Party, whatever. But

Speaker:

I think that the world is as it is. What I can say is I'm not going to not be honest and clear

Speaker:

about what happens and how I see things. However, they block me, they call me in two hours to

Speaker:

say, no, you can't run or a week from now, or they put $100,000 barrier to try to participate

Speaker:

in I'll be honest. I'm not going to, irrespective what happens, I'm going to continue to challenge

Speaker:

the NDP's sellout on NATO, on Palestine, on- There's a laundry list. It's okay. to have

Speaker:

a realistic impact on the race, there needs to be dozens of people who are willing to

Speaker:

support in volunteer capacity of all the different things that needed to be done to amplify the

Speaker:

message. And then there is gonna be a need to have a thousand or two thousand or a couple

Speaker:

thousand people that take out memberships to at minimum demonstrate to, it going to be

Speaker:

Avi Lewis, Leah Gazan, whoever is supposed to be the more sort of left side of the,

Speaker:

bit more of the officialdom, and to show that there's actually a race. Yeah, there's actual

Speaker:

race and people are pushing, you know, it's not just like, you know, some random dude

Speaker:

making some comments about economic democracy, about, know, maybe we should talk about withdrawing

Speaker:

from NATO, but there's actually some people who really want those ideas and sort of pull

Speaker:

the bait to the left. I think there does need to be that. And obviously, in the context

Speaker:

of having the possibility of winning, you would need tens of thousands of people to become

Speaker:

members. So I don't really see getting around that, but I'm certainly not... know, committed

Speaker:

to the NDP forever or in any way asking anybody to commit in that way. Yeah, I don't know

Speaker:

if that sort of mostly answers the question, but yeah. Well, it does. And for folks listening

Speaker:

who are thinking about taking out a membership, like, it has to be Eve that signs you up. So

Speaker:

he has to be approved as a candidate. So I think finding out how you can start to shape up his

Speaker:

campaign, getting like, is there a way for folks to get in touch with you? Cause like

Speaker:

what more than one person replied with, you know, they didn't have a policy question. They

Speaker:

weren't going to throw you any hard balls. They just want to know how they can help. They are

Speaker:

already on board and want to know how they can volunteer or contribute. So have you been

Speaker:

able to set up any way to onboard people yet or Yeah, slowly here. The Socialist Caucus

Speaker:

has a meeting on the 13th that's going to do more on... was a first meeting, there was

Speaker:

some setting up of people responsible for different things that need to be done on the campaign.

Speaker:

And I think at this point the best thing would probably just to email me, which is just my

Speaker:

email, and I'll pass it around, or if people can make it to the... the 13th meeting. don't

Speaker:

actually remember the exact time of that meeting, but I can forward that. so, yeah, we definitely

Speaker:

need people to take on different whatever expertise people have to take on different tasks. And

Speaker:

I agree with you terms of the, you know, we haven't asked anyone to purchase memberships

Speaker:

at this point or to become members because, you know, that all needs to be kind of ironed

Speaker:

out with the It sounds like to me, if I may humbly suggest, the first thing you need is

Speaker:

a campaign manager. Do you have one yet? Well, yeah, we have the interim, Barry's interim

Speaker:

in that position. But if you know anyone who I have an idea of somebody else, I mean,

Speaker:

short term, but if you have any ideas for somebody, then we'd be happy to... Yes, we will talk

Speaker:

about that. Yeah, because I'm not going to give out your email Eve, like I don't know

Speaker:

how many people just like some bombard you. You have other things and we'll I will definitely

Speaker:

find a link to the meeting for the Socialist Caucus and we'll include that in the show notes

Speaker:

so people listening can first kind of step in there and give you a little bit of breathing

Speaker:

space. So like maybe there's another email that someone else can man for you or can can. cover

Speaker:

for you for a moment because yeah I don't want to overwhelm you at this stage there's there's

Speaker:

kind of other steps that you've clearly got to like work out first and get in touch with

Speaker:

the party because yeah they've not even officially announced there is a leadership race I mean

Speaker:

it's implied Don Davies is in there right now he's kind of real vanilla he's not gonna

Speaker:

stir the pot right now let's say You said one in a million chances. I don't know how to work

Speaker:

those out. Let's say you do. And what do we got? Seven seats? We'll get you a seat,

Speaker:

all right? Let's say we get eight. Do you think you could make an impact on Canadian foreign

Speaker:

policy? Like just for one example or NATO, if you want to be even more specific with your

Speaker:

energy there? I do. I certainly do. I certainly think on foreign policy. I think there's no

Speaker:

doubt about that in terms of being, know, both just in the terms of substance and highlighting

Speaker:

issues that are just not being highlighted and also what's called a tactical in the sense

Speaker:

of, you know, willingness to be disruptive in a political sense, you know, like in whatever

Speaker:

method of articulating the issue, right? And whether that's getting arrested for something

Speaker:

or... you know, that those kind of things and and and and you know, the the nature of the

Speaker:

position would have a curtailing impact on the sort of ability to just, you know, be

Speaker:

a alone, whatever, if you want to call it that. But so I would I would I would concede to that

Speaker:

to a certain extent. if you're in that position, you're not just representing yourself like

Speaker:

right now. And basically just certainly outside of this campaigning, I'm just representing

Speaker:

myself. And even in this campaign, you know, I'm just mostly just representing kind of myself,

Speaker:

obviously in alignment with the socialist caucus and everyone who, who, who, volunteers and

Speaker:

may volunteer. But, but it, but I feel like I don't feel kind of like constrained by, you

Speaker:

know, some boats. You know, I do think, you you, if you're going to be in the position,

Speaker:

you do have to obviously respect, you know, membership boats, right? So, so you, you can't

Speaker:

just go into the position of leader of the NDP and just be like, well, there's no party policy

Speaker:

on all kinds of issues and whatever your personal position is, it becomes a position. in that

Speaker:

position, I would respect the sort of, that stuff much more than in the effort to get

Speaker:

there. in the position, I have no doubt that on foreign policy issues, I think more generally,

Speaker:

I think... I think that, mean, like we have a, climate crisis is just, it's just like

Speaker:

it's out of control, like what we're seeing. And we literally, you know, the Globe Mail

Speaker:

report on business, we're to get to 4.7 million barrels a day of tar sands oil. And Heather

Speaker:

MacPherson supports pipelines. Of course. This is like, obviously this needs to be phased

Speaker:

out or shuttered in like, you know, is it, is it, is it? two years, is it five years, is

Speaker:

it... There has to be someone who is saying that in a direct sense. I worked at the Communications

Speaker:

Energy Paperworkers Union where they represented a bunch of the Suncor people and I get that

Speaker:

the here and now of the real world is not as simple as, okay, we just gotta phase it out

Speaker:

and then it all happens. I get that, obviously, but you have to be able to at least articulate

Speaker:

the basics of the... you know, scientific consensus on stuff like that. And there's just like no

Speaker:

one even willing to like state that in the political arena. Would it lead to a huge backlash? Does

Speaker:

it have electoral costs in certain sense in the short term? Maybe. I mean, they're at seven

Speaker:

seats right now. mean, right. So so like the the Jagmeet Singh, like really, you know, following

Speaker:

the establishment, kind of following what the media wants kind of kind of way, you know,

Speaker:

led to seven seats. So so there's a lot of people who who you know, they understand that there's

Speaker:

some big problems with capitalism. They understand that the notion of like billionaires, I mean,

Speaker:

it's completely odious. It's obviously totally inequality, but it's also just a complete

Speaker:

threat to democracy. Like how can you believe that you live in a democracy when there's people

Speaker:

who have billions and get to decide so much of economic life and then there's others who,

Speaker:

you know, making 16 bucks an hour, right? Like I think there's a lot of, concern about these

Speaker:

issues out there and and uh... you know is it is it easy to articulate that do people have

Speaker:

all kinds of confused ideas about all kinds of different issues of course uh... but but

Speaker:

i i i think there's no there's no doubt that there is uh... crying me for uh... pushing

Speaker:

on some of these issues and and specifically on the foreign policy issues i really do believe

Speaker:

that that uh... there'd be you know, many different ways of impacting a discussion that's completely

Speaker:

closed off right now. Well, especially if you're willing to be a little bit more disruptive,

Speaker:

because that's been one of my main issues even once the NDP got to a better position. I'm

Speaker:

not going even say the right position, because like you mentioned, there's still issues with

Speaker:

that. But it was the bare minimum. It was like, just stand up in the legislature. Not even

Speaker:

once did they use this mailing list they have, these millions in donations that they've taken,

Speaker:

and the platform that they have in the house and in front of all these mics. Did they call

Speaker:

people into the streets? Like never, for nothing almost. Like it doesn't seem to matter what

Speaker:

level of crisis we're in. They're still only ever willing to ask you to sign a petition

Speaker:

or donate. And they're politicians. really should all be in jail at this point, not because

Speaker:

they're criminals, but because they've tried everything possible within the House and been

Speaker:

reprimanded for it and been trespassed or whatever. I mean, they've been elected to positions of

Speaker:

power during a fucking genocide and we're supposed to pat them on the back because they

Speaker:

wore a pin into the House. Whether or not, you know, you could win a vote or sway a vote,

Speaker:

I get it, it's really not the be-all end-all. And even influencing the liberal position

Speaker:

on foreign policy or participation in NATO, I mean, being provided with an alternate position

Speaker:

is a starting point, but I think the biggest value you would have or someone like you in

Speaker:

that position is the willingness and the ability to get people to get out into the streets,

Speaker:

to be disruptive, to try avenues that were previously closed off to them, right? To not follow the

Speaker:

rules, perhaps. Do know what I mean? To rebel. We need revolution and we need people to know

Speaker:

that they don't have to work within all these really confined systems in the exact way they

Speaker:

were designed. I expect if you do get into this institution that is such a problem, not

Speaker:

just the NDP but Canadian politics, that you're the kind of person that'd be willing to completely

Speaker:

shake it up and not be worried about the personal repercussions, the career ending. manifestations

Speaker:

that play into most politicians' minds, right? They always check themselves. They're always,

Speaker:

is this popular? Is this okay with the party line? You know, I mean the consultants, not

Speaker:

the policy book. And they're always second-guessing themselves. even, I mean, I'm sure you think

Speaker:

things through. I'm not saying you're just like off on a whim, but you surely don't worry

Speaker:

about these things all that much, right? Like, will the Zionists have something to say about

Speaker:

me if I say this? I mean, you're already there. You're already in the weeds. So I think that

Speaker:

holds a lot of promise. A more rebellious form of politics that, you know, because the way

Speaker:

it's done now really doesn't, it's not moving the needle. Even if you had a good leader doing

Speaker:

it that way. I'm hoping to see you shake it up a little bit. I mean, I appreciate you

Speaker:

taking the time to do it. I know you're doing it for a purpose and not for personal gain,

Speaker:

because if you thought you had a target on yourself already, you know. You're going to increase

Speaker:

it, right? You've already said, know, the Israeli lobby, the Zionist lobby has already

Speaker:

gear it up to kind of smear you. I hope we don't see the same come from within the NDP

Speaker:

establishment, but time will tell. Let's say Abby Lewis runs against you. You said you're

Speaker:

going to go up against Heather McPherson and a lot of her positions. You've even outlined

Speaker:

them. What if Abby Lewis is your opponent? Will you go after him? Yeah, of course. I mean,

Speaker:

go after in a sense. I mean, I've written about Stephen Lewis and Michelle Landsberg's

Speaker:

anti-Palestinian policy. But they've come around, just in time. yeah. So, you know, I can tell

Speaker:

you that I sponsored a... public letter around the NDP withdrawing from the Canada-Israel

Speaker:

inter-parliamentary group and I had Naomi's and I had Avi's emails and you'll find that

Speaker:

their names are not on that a couple years ago, right? So I totally believe that Avi

Speaker:

is not going to, he's clearly better than Heather McPherson. I would prefer Avi in that position

Speaker:

than Heather McPherson. I also don't think that he's come out on Canadian military. He's

Speaker:

maybe been substantially better. And I do believe personally him and Naomi, of course, are much

Speaker:

better on Palestine than he has been for many years. So I think that is genuine. you have

Speaker:

to also respect, if your parents are a certain way and you go in a different way, you have

Speaker:

to also respect that. But I do think on the military question, that's not something that

Speaker:

he will push. And I will push that. And just in foreign policy generally, don't think that

Speaker:

there's basically alignment with the Washington-led geopolitical outlook that is leading to this

Speaker:

huge increase in military spending. So I think that would be, know, quote unquote vulnerability,

Speaker:

if you want to frame it like that, from a left perspective. But having said that, and I'm

Speaker:

not, you know, I'm going to be respectful but clear in my criticisms on policy issues. Having

Speaker:

said that, if there was a scenario where they did allow me to run and there was momentum

Speaker:

behind it and it got to the point where it was like, know, like, Abhi is the only one that

Speaker:

really has a chance of defeating Heather McPherson or whoever else is maybe more of the establishment,

Speaker:

you know, those questions would become, would arise, right? And I don't know my exact answer

Speaker:

to those questions right now, but... But I would go back to the idea that I am less bad.

Speaker:

think there is this sort of real world of how things are. I said this about in 2017, I joined

Speaker:

to vote for Nikki Ashton. And I asked, it didn't campaign in a significant way, but I asked

Speaker:

people to certain network of email people saying you should register to vote for Nikki Ashton

Speaker:

because Nikki Ashton, to my mind, was know, substantively better than the rest. But I did

Speaker:

that even though I had, in the campaign, I asked Nikki about, at an event here in Montreal,

Speaker:

whether she voted for the 2011 bombing of Libya. And her answer was a fascinating answer. And

Speaker:

I'm still not sure if it's worse what she said to me, that I've said she just voted for it.

Speaker:

And she said she didn't remember if she was in the house when the vote happened. So we

Speaker:

know that the NDP voted for two different bombings of Libya in 2011, which 14 years later is a

Speaker:

complete utter disaster. And she answered by saying she didn't remember, so like you literally,

Speaker:

there was a vote to destroy a country and your response, and I don't know if it was an honest

Speaker:

response or not, was to say you don't remember whether you had voted to destroy that country

Speaker:

or not or whether you had stepped out. She was kind of implying that. that she wasn't on board

Speaker:

for it and she was, you know, whatever, she'd been pressured by, by Leighton and whatever.

Speaker:

And I, I get that, I get that's a dynamic that exists within, within the caucus and whatever.

Speaker:

Even after she made that, told me that, which I wrote about, you know, right away, I didn't

Speaker:

hide that. I still, I still, you know, again, not, I didn't spend a lot of energy, but I

Speaker:

did campaign for her because it is what it is, right? I think it's better to have a less

Speaker:

bad or, you know. Please don't make that your campaign slogan though, Eve. You've repeated

Speaker:

it. Do not make posters with say, I am the less bad candidate. We've got to come up with something

Speaker:

else. I won't, won't, I won't state that in other public forum, but you get the basic,

Speaker:

the basic point. I absolutely do. NDP voters know exactly about picking the lesser evil

Speaker:

Eve. I mean, they know all about it. All about it. Oh yeah. I mean, yeah, anyway. I, I, I

Speaker:

just, to me, it's a matter of being like, it's about being honest and open about if there's

Speaker:

some form of concession, there has to be an honest and opening. I said this about, I'll

Speaker:

take this point a little bit further. said this about when I worked at the Communications and

Speaker:

Energy Papers and Workers' Union, became Uniform, so there were about two and a half years, 2012,

Speaker:

2014. One of the things that really struck me is that, like I don't... I don't have a problem,

Speaker:

just as a concrete, I was working in research but I did basically a lot of communications,

Speaker:

I wrote op-eds for the president of union and stuff like that, press releases. I don't have

Speaker:

a problem if someone says to me, the Globe and Mail is not gonna take an anti-capitalist position,

Speaker:

anti-capitalist op-ed, but they'll take something that says, you know, we have some lack of democracy

Speaker:

in the economic sphere, you know, they'll take something sort of wish you well. I don't have

Speaker:

a problem with someone who writes that op-ed for the Globe and Mail knowing that's the best

Speaker:

I can get out of that context. But then on your own website, on your own where you do have

Speaker:

the ability, on your own conference, your own speech, whatever, where you do have the ability

Speaker:

to say, hey, we need to replace capitalism, that you do, you you concede there, but then

Speaker:

you push there. And because it's part of like a bigger project of we're, you know, we're

Speaker:

trying to... consciousness raised, we're trying to build, we're trying to move forward. So

Speaker:

that to me is like, you know, there is institutional realities, there is stuff like that. But

Speaker:

you and you push whatever you can within that, and then you continue with, you know, what

Speaker:

you really believe, if you like, in the alternative kind of kind of areas. And, and, yeah, so

Speaker:

I don't know if that's the, you know, total answer to it. But yes, and back to the specific,

Speaker:

I will definitely challenge Leah Gazan or or Avi on who I understand with the two likely

Speaker:

kind of more left-wing candidates I will challenge them on where I see that they are, you know

Speaker:

Conceding or they're they're not going far enough or whatnot. Good luck. I I do anticipate that

Speaker:

they will give you a hard time, but your hope does lie in Working that federal council and

Speaker:

the executive to make sure the rules aren't just implicitly made to make it almost impossible

Speaker:

for you. Like I said, length of membership or whatnot, that would discount you right away.

Speaker:

But once those rules are set and the race starts, there surely will be more to talk about. But

Speaker:

yeah, very exciting times, especially in a time where nobody was really talking about

Speaker:

the NDP. You've got them all talking about the NDP again. You fucking got me talking about

Speaker:

damn party again. I try not to. I try to just walk away, but you draw me back in. You're

Speaker:

going to draw some of my comrades back in. know it. I apologize for that. It's all for a good

Speaker:

cause. do understand the practicality of trying to work these institutions. It's not for me

Speaker:

right now because I just had such a bad taste in my mouth. I just feel my energy is somewhere

Speaker:

else, but I do appreciate that comments are still. willing to wade in there and provide

Speaker:

an alternative, even just to show people they're another part of the Overton window we don't

Speaker:

very often get to see. That doesn't get a lot of exposure. It's saved for, you know, left-wing

Speaker:

parties that aren't even invited to debate. So I would love to see you get up there and

Speaker:

debate Heather McPherson or anybody else, but particularly the establishment favorite. If

Speaker:

that happens, oh, I'd love to have a conversation with you beforehand. Um, cause yeah, we've

Speaker:

got lots of dirt on McPherson. Uh, not a good choice for most folks. Um, but yeah, no, Eve,

Speaker:

I appreciate you coming in really last minute too. Once I saw that announcement, I had a

Speaker:

lot of questions for you and then the audience came up with some questions for you and,

Speaker:

uh, yeah. Be prepared to be pushed on, on disability rights though. And to come up with a policy

Speaker:

that's written by disabled people that takes into account the abject failures. That is

Speaker:

my advice because you could really rally a lot of people that are really eager for something

Speaker:

different. Yeah. So good luck Eve. Get out there. Keep us all informed on what's happening.

Speaker:

I know you like you got to start a blog like that's just really my navigating. this craziness

Speaker:

that will become the NDP leadership race. Any parting words? You're on the campaign trail

Speaker:

now, kind of. You know, that's unusual for you. Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, for most

Speaker:

of this audience is keep doing what you're doing and, and, you know, lots of different ways,

Speaker:

of course, to this electoral element is kind of new to me. But, but yeah, I keep doing

Speaker:

what people are doing. And, you know, if, if things move forward in the positive way,

Speaker:

If people do want to both assist with the campaign and then choose to become a member for a

Speaker:

short period or for a long period to oppose, to vote for, that's obviously much appreciated.

Speaker:

But yeah, mostly just keep doing what people are doing. Keep doing what you're doing. I

Speaker:

know this isn't going to suck up all your energy. You've got more than that to spare. And good

Speaker:

luck with any upcoming court cases. I forgot to mention that at the beginning, that was

Speaker:

your last episode on here, was getting pulled in by Montreal cops for, you know, tweeting.

Speaker:

So I can only imagine what the vetting, how the vetting team looks upon that. But we shall

Speaker:

see, we shall see. They're going to have a chuckle. And they're probably very nervous about you

Speaker:

announcing, which brings me joy that you're making the establishment nervous no matter

Speaker:

what happens and that the Zios are really agitated and wasting their energy there. So. If nothing

Speaker:

else, If nothing else, we make them uncomfortable. Thank you so much, Eve. Thanks. Thanks a lot.

Speaker:

Please share our content and if you have the means, consider becoming a patron. Not only

Speaker:

does our support come from the progressive community, so does our content. So reach out to us and

Speaker:

let us know what or who we should be amplifying. So until next time, keep disrupting.