Adam Pankratz: The NDP is here to rescue us from ‘cis’ men

Patrick Lagacé has the more serious yet witty take below this take by Pankratz:

…Among the various requirements to be approved to run for the poisoned chalice of NDP leader is a Nomination Signature Form, which must be signed by 500 members in good standing of the NDP. So far, so normal. Then, as is too often the case for the new left, normal leaves the room to be replaced by grievance and nonsense.

And so, to ensure common sense is entirely absent from the signature process, the NDP requires “at least fifty percent (50%) of the total required signatures must be from members who do not identify as a cis man,” and “a minimum of one hundred (100) signatures must be from members of equity-seeking groups, including but not limited to racialized members, Indigenous members, members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community, and persons living with disabilities.”

If there were any lingering doubt, the party of the working class is now definitively the party of identity politics and grievance culture. This is the language that broadcasts to Canadians that the message the NDP got from their electoral drubbing is that they must be even more radical.

While the NDP’s tone deafness to public sentiment is remarkable, the manner in which it facilitates the exclusion of women is even more staggering. Nowhere, readers of the rules will note, is it specified that 50 per cent of signatories must be female, only not “cis man.” That is to say, a candidate can be approved with a combination of cis men and trans women, all natal males, without the need to seek the approval of a single female. While this scenario is admittedly unlikely, it is staggering that a party so hell bent on “inclusivity” and “equity” is so obviously comfortable with the erasure of women from its inclusion criteria. By refusing to mention the word “woman” anywhere, the NDP have signalled their virtue, all while displaying the electoral communications sophistication of trepanned gnat….

Adam Pankratz is a lecturer at the University of British Columbia’s Sauder School of Business.

Source: Adam Pankratz: The NDP is here to rescue us from ‘cis’ men

Legacé: Le NPD domine dans UQAM—Les-Nids-De-Poule

…Le NPD déconne parce que l’immense majorité de la population canadienne est cisgenre. Ce n’est pas une opinion, c’est un fait : les non-cis – transgenres et non-binaires – composent très exactement 0,33 % de la population canadienne de plus de 15 ans selon le recensement de 2021, soit 100 815 personnes sur 30,5 millions de personnes.

Mais oui, limitons le nombre d’hommes cisgenres qui peuvent appuyer une personne désirant diriger le NPD, ça me semble une excellente façon d’élargir la tente politique de ce parti !

Là où le NPD déconne aussi, c’est pour la vérification de l’étiquette de tous ces signataires. Comment les instances néo-démocrates vont-elles vérifier si un signataire est cisgenre… ou pas ?

S’il est 2S, soit bispirituel autochtone ?

Et véritablement autochtone ?

J’ai un TDA diagnostiqué : suis-je en situation de handicap ?

Passage sublime du texte de Catherine Lévesque dans le Post : Le parti n’a pas répondu immédiatement à savoir comment les dirigeants du parti vérifieraient si les signataires s’identifient comme cisgenres ou faisant partie d’un groupe « en quête d’équité ».

Pour authentifier les cis, va-t-on demander aux signataires de baisser leur pantalon ?

Pour le 2S, euh, comment on vérifie cela ?

Je cesse de déconner : le NPD a bien le droit de faire ce qu’il veut, même divorcer formellement de la majorité des Canadiens qui ne sacralisent pas leur sexe, leur genre, leur sigle, leur orientation sexuelle, leur patrimoine culturel. Bref, la moyenne des ours-es.

Mais dans le rayon du signalement de vertu, ces règles sont presque aussi niaiseuses que le discours anti-raciste-anti-colonialiste-anti-patriarcal qu’on retrouve dans les associations facultaires les plus militantes de l’UQAM.

Le NPD est sorti des élections du 28 avril avec le pire résultat depuis sa fondation, tant dans le nombre de députés que dans sa part du vote populaire. Il a perdu le statut de parti officiel au Parlement. Son chef Jagmeet Singh a fini troisième dans sa circonscription.

Source: Le NPD domine dans UQAM—Les-Nids-De-Poule

… The NDP is messing around because the vast majority of the Canadian population is cisgender. It’s not an opinion, it’s a fact: non-cis – transgender and non-binary – make up exactly 0.33% of the Canadian population over the age of 15 according to the 2021 census, or 100,815 people out of 30.5 million people.

But yes, let’s limit the number of cisgender men who can support a person wishing to lead the NPD, it seems to me an excellent way to expand the political tent of this party!

Where the NDP also messes up is for the verification of the label of all these signatories. How will the New Democratic bodies verify whether a signatory is cisgender… or not?

If he is 2S, or indigenous bispiritual?

And truly indigenous?

I have a diagnosed ADD: am I disabled?

Sublime passage from Catherine Lévesque’s text in the Post: The party did not immediately respond to how party leaders would verify whether the signatories identify themselves as cisgenders or part of a group “in search of equity”.

To authenticate the cis, will we ask the signatories to lower their pants?

For the 2S, uh, how do we check this?

I stop fooling around: the NDP has the right to do what it wants, even formally divorce the majority of Canadians who do not sanctify their sex, gender, acronym, sexual orientation, cultural heritage. In short, the average of bears.

But in the radius of virtue reporting, these rules are almost as silly as the anti-racist-anti-colonialist-anti-patriarchal discourse found in the most militant faculty associations of UQAM.

The NDP came out of the April 28 elections with the worst result since its foundation, both in the number of deputies and in its share of the popular vote. It has lost the status of official party in Parliament. His leader Jagmeet Singh finished third in his riding.

More on the Charte des valeurs québécoise – Round-up

Starting with the dirty little secret of just how poor Quebec’s record on integrating newcomers into the government workforce – only 2 percent, compared to close to 9 percent visible minority population (2006 Census). Not surprisingly, the SFPQ union supports the Charte, as it reinforces their existing membership base.

La Charte vise moins de 2 % des fonctionnaires | Le Devoir.

PQ gets backing of civil-servants’ union for religion plan

Premier Marois maintains that the Charte is équilibrée (​Laïcité – Pauline Marois affirme que sa proposition est équilibrée) and the PQ presses the private sector to follow the government’s lead on secular workplaces (PQ presses private sector to follow its lead on secular workplaces).

But more on the divisions within Quebec on the Charte. This ranges from Montreal, Quebec’s most diverse city, but Western Quebec, next to Ottawa, and diverse, remains undecided. And various groups, including sovereigntists, also expressing opposition:

Charte des valeurs: l’île de Montréal se rebiffe

 Charter widens rifts between mayors, PQ and sovereigntists

Charte des valeurs: les CPE (Centres de la petite enfance) divisés 

West Quebec institutions undecided on ‘opting out’ of Charter of Values

Charte des valeurs: les indépendantistes divisés

Charte des valeurs québécoises – Les souverainistes divisés

Québec inclusif – Engouement pour le manifeste anti-Charte

Couillard veut scinder la «charte de la chicane» pour l’adopter

And some more general commentary, starting with some good political analysis, particularly from Paul Wells:

Charter of values: Old dogs, nous tricks

PQ’s tower of babble

Marois’s Charter of Values is more about electoral politics than sovereignty

Who actually applauded Quebec’s values charter?

And a good discussion about federal paternalism, acknowledging the vigorous debate within Quebec but without reference to the legitimate federal role, grounded in the Constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but the universal declaration of human rights and other instruments.

Given the strength of the debate and controversy within Quebec, the PQ may have over-reached. I would be curious to know the advice of the public servants on the proposal – likely not comfortable given the ideological and political basis for the Charte:

Le paternalisme fédéral

Charter of Quebec values on collision course with Constitution?

And Justin Trudeau, Liberal leader who was first off the mark criticizing the Charte, has an op ed expressing faith that Quebeckers will reject the proposal, with Patrick Lagacé noting the politics of the initiative:

 Justin Trudeau writes: I have faith in Quebec. So should you 

The PQ’s not racist – just running scared

And a reminder that the French approach, which Quebec sometimes to draw from without due consideration of how Quebec has a history of generally successfully integrating immigrants from countries as diverse as Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Haiti, with some of the more recent waves of immigrants having more challenges (as happens elsewhere):

Quebec charter of values plan could take a few pages from France: Don Murray

And a sensible call to pursue the Bouchard-Taylor recommendation of a white paper and consultations to have an informed discussion and debate, rather than what appears to be an ad hoc electoral and divisive strategy of throwing out poorly conceived ideas and proposals. On the other hand, that may help kill the Charte.

La Charte des valeurs – L’espace du compromis

Expect that coverage will quieten over the next few weeks until the parliamentary and related processes pick up. But I have been wrong before!