From: myhui@bnr.ca (Michael Hui)
Subject: NDP in British Columbia, Canada (was Re: Rush is...)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 02:17:29 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.202557.24775@u.washington.edu> sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes:
>For an example of a nearby party whose policies are more like what
>the rest of the world regards as "socialist", look at
>the New Democratic Party in Canada.

There are many different areas a government may concentrate (in a
relative sense, when compared to other parties) its use of public
funds, and the way the funds are used also varies.

The NDP advocates self help with dignity as the principle aim for poor
folk, or merely unemployed folk: battered women crisis centers, rape
crisis centers, hot meals for poor kids, enforced alimony payments,
unpaid maternity leave, gradual transition from welfare (social
security) to self sustained mode so that the individual will be ENTICED
financially to seek work, low cost housing that has a lot of the work
done by residents, day care for poor working mothers, universal health
care.

Most of the above issues fall under two categories:

If a citizen encounters an accident or sickness that's extraordinary
and certainly not due to his/her own fault, or even laziness, then
public funds are spent to help that citizen (health care, crisis
centers).  In this case, both the rich and the poor gets publicly
funded service. Hence it's hardly a "soak the rich" philosophy.

If a citizen is lazy, stupid, brought up without a lot of skills, or is
displaced out of the mainstream due to some reason, whether self
inflicted or not, public fund is used to help that citizen get back
into the mainstream work force, by making it financially preferrable and
also providing the counselling that may be needed to turn that person
back into a well adjusted, productive worker.

The other major parties would rather restrict public funds in the above
endeavors as a show of ability to the tax payer that they can cut taxes
with Real Decisiveness. But those poor (or stupid) folk still aren't
working. The problem is still not solved. Wouldn't it create more wealth
for the whole country if more people are working?

The end result is a further spread between the rich and poor. This is
not in itself an immoral thing, this widening spread. Where it really
hurts is that it creates an unhealthy society, when eventually the poor
will revolt and the whole state will come tumbling down. I'm not even
argueing on either side of whether the poor at that time will have the
"moral authority" to revolt. Perhaps they do not. But so what? It will
happen.

Socialism is not about the above issues. It really deals with the idea
that state-run enterprises are the preferred route for certain sectors
of the economy, most notably in natural resources.  I do not think the
NDP in BC have any plans to convert any sector of the economy presently
run by the private sector into the public sector.

The coordinated state-business relationship so succesfully practiced by
Germany and Japan can only be analyzed on its merits and pitfalls,
rather than by first categorizing it into a preconceived model of
socialism vs capitalism. The issue is whether collusion between
government and Big Business, and most importantly how that collusion is
done, is actually productive to the country in the long run.  When I
say "country", I also include its citizens, their quality of life, and
the enrichment of their intellectual property. Before I get a knee jerk
response like "church/business and state don't mix", I ask you to
consider why you have a government in the first place, how does that
government relate to the people, is the government made up of people,
or is it made up of computers and robots or aliens from another
planet?  If government is something you hate, why have it? Now that you
can't live without it, then why not steer it to benefit society in as
many sectors as is appropriate?

The NDP in British Columbia, where I grew up, and have mostly
supported, are out in front in the social services sector in providing
help to those out of the mainstream to get back into the mainstream.
They surely do not have any of the Socialist ideas (anymore) I outlined
above.

Michael MY Hui  myhui@bnr.ca  Ottawa Canada
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:51480 alt.politics.elections:16543