The political parties in the parliament and monopoly-owned media
have unleashed a barrage of propaganda recently about how "the
budget surplus" should be spent. The release of Federal Finance
Minister Paul Martin's economic statement is an occasion to
deafen us further with this talk which goes on under the guise of
discussion. Typical of the coverage is how one newspaper wrote
that Martin's statement will unleash "a public opinion war (with)
public interest groups and political parties ... lining up on
both sides of the ideological spectrum to battle it out over what
Ottawa should do with the first federal budget surplus in more
than 30 years."
Central to this barrage of propaganda that goes on under the
guise of discussion is talk about the so-called "left" position
i.e. that of the NDP which is to now increase spending on
social programs and "job creation," and the so-called "right"
position i.e. that of the Reform Party and the Progressive
Conservatives which is to cut taxes and pay down the debt. In
all of this, the Liberals are portrayed as representing the
"centre" of the political spectrum; walking a tight-rope, doing
what is "sensible", seeking to please everyone, and so on. The
position of the Liberals can be summed up by nineteenth century
conceptions of "fair play" in which they are the representatives
of the so-called golden age.
Clearly, the federal Liberals are trying to use the "fiscal
dividend" to accommodate the opposition on both sides of the
bourgeoisie's political field. This concerns differences of
opinion on how to best pay the rich and keep the opposition of
the working class and people in check. In this, the government
has established its policy of exacting tribute from the entire
society, slashing social programs, reducing benefits to
unemployed workers, handing over monies to various interests in
the name of "job creation," jacking up CPP premiums, creating a
Team Canada Inc. to absorb all the risks of the monopolies
competing for foreign markets, and so on, in order to meet its
obligations to the financiers and monopolies at home and abroad.
It has presented its logic that in doing so, the people will
"gain" in the end.
There are differences of opinion between the political
parties of the rich as to which of these measures to implement,
but none deal with the direction of the economy as a whole and
whom it should serve.
The House of Commons Finance Committee Chairman Maurizio
Bevilacqua told reporters that "the big question is how to use
the levels of fiscal policy responsibly, but still give Canadians
the tools to generate economic prosperity." "It's not an
either/or issue," he added.
The bottom line is that neither the Chretien Liberals nor
any of the opposition on what is called the left or right of the
political spectrum are planning on changing the direction of the
economy to stop paying the rich and increase funding for social
programs on that basis. If before they paid the rich in the name
of "eliminating the deficit," now they will do it in the name of
"paying down the debt," "creating jobs" and power sharing with
the provinces, which will then use the funds to pay the rich as
they are clamouring to do.
The monopoly-owned media and political parties of the rich
are calling on the Canadian working class and people to take
sides between one or the other of them as if they have a stake in
this discussion. Choosing sides is the role given to the Canadian
working class and people in this equation. They have no role
whatsoever in the decision-making as concerns the affairs of the
polity, especially its most important component, the economy.
They are marginalized totally, with their only role supposed to
be to support one or the other party which represents alien class
interests.
Should they take sides in this affair, or should they affirm
their own interests, which is to insist that their claims upon
society, and especially the economy, be given first priority?
The capitalist economy is in deep, all-sided crisis. The
financial oligarchy is attempting to extricate itself from this
crisis through the anti-social offensive. The Chretien Liberals
and others want to keep the workers from coming to the warranted
conclusion about the crisis of the system, and maintain the
illusion that governments of the financial oligarchy spend the
people's money with an aim that is different from the aim of the
capitalist system, that is, the pursuit of maximum capitalist
profit.
The society is divided between rich and poor with a section
in between being pushed into the poor. It is divided between
haves and have-nots, with a section of small haves in between who
are wiped out, eaten up, forced into bankruptcy. Politically, the
haves have their representatives and compete for the votes of the
have-nots. They wage a struggle between them which is carried out
within the context of the right, left and centre of a political
spectrum in which the working class and people are completely
disempowered and have no representation.
On the other side, stand the disempowered "electors" who are
fighting to defend themselves against the anti-social offensive
and advance a pro-social program which can take Canada into the
twenty-first century on the road to progress. Politically, this
program has been put forward by CPC(M-L). It is the program to
Prepare for the Twenty-First Century by Stop Paying the Rich
Increase Funding for Social Programs. The elaboration of this
program has begun across the country. TML Daily calls on the
workers, women, youth and students and all progressive forces to
discuss and elaborate this program and not get fooled by the
propaganda barrage that passes for discussion in the House of
Commons and the media.
TML DAILY, 10/97
Shawgi Tell
Graduate School of Education
University at Buffalo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
