> Tim Francis-Wright wrote:
>
> >(While everyone was flaming each other about Barack Obama a few days
> >ago, I waited in vain for anyone to start talking about why Canada
> >has a left-leaning [as in belonging to the Socialist International]
> >party, the NDP, with actual power [as in running two provinces and
> >holding seats in Parliament], but not the United States.
>
> So what's the answer?
>
> Doug
-------------------------
This would require a long discussion of why the US, alone of the capitalist
democracies, has never had a mass-based socialist or labour party for an
extended historical period.
But I'm not sure the discussion would be of more than academic interest today, since, IMO, the differences between the Democrats in the US, the NDP, and the social-democratic and labour parties abroad don't really run that deep. Actually, I don't think they ever really did, and certainly not since the social democrats abandoned their formal attachment to public ownership.
It's true that the US liberal bourgeoisie supports the Democrats, which places the party on the farthest right of the liberal spectrum, but the DP and social-democratic parties are still based on the same social constituencies and have the same social policies. They have all traditionally been tied to the trade unions and social movements, although as the unions' relative social weight and influence has waned, that tie has been progressively eroded. Whenever they take office, they are all compelled to turn away from their base and their program, and govern much like their conservative rivals in accordance with the dictates of the system, including in foreign policy.
The NDP has been the least successful of the social-democratic parties in taking root; it commands the allegiance of about a fifth of the electorate, and has never formed a national government. While Canadian social-democrats have been able to form their own party, it is a weak one, although it has been credited with pushing the Liberals, Canada's traditional governing party, to the left over such matters as medicare.
You would be hard pressed to distinguish rank-and-file NDP'ers and Democrats. NDP'ers have identified strongly with Democratic presidential candidates since the New Deal, when the party was known as the CCF. The DLC leadership of the Democratic party is closer to the Liberals. Canada's Conservative party resembles the Republicans, although the social conservatives in the party are far less influential than in the States. All of this reflects the fact that the Canadian political culture is more to the left, although even this is not the case if we only consider the "blue states".
It's interesting to speculate, in fact, whether US and Canadian liberals would opt for the Democrats or the NDP if their improbable dream of a common federation ever came to pass. Since support would almost certainly go to the party deemed to have the better chance at power, the NDP's relative share of the liberal voting bloc would probably decline, but the DP left would be strengthened. This hypothetical exercise gives you some idea of how close the two parties are structurally and politically, even if the political context within which they operate is quite different. So an American NDP (or a fully-matured Green Party competing for power, for that matter) would not, as some suppose, look very different than the Democrats do today - unless the context were to change, but then nothing, including the DP, would look the same and everything would be up for grabs.
MG