Luckily as a Canadian I did not have to vote in such a circus, our choices and results were not better by any means but at least I could vote for only my MP and be aware that my vote wasn't for any imperialist. Was kinda weird though that my local communist party had a shit line on a few key issues and the candidate we had left the party and immediately began uncriticaly repeating some lib shit, but also left for good reasons.
The party is very centralised and didn't include indigenous rights as a large enough part of the platform, it was however still very much there and still a much better take than any major party had (actually called genocide what it was rather than just hand wave it as 'the past'), just was also weird that there was a very "nation-centric" focus that often placed english in quebec in the same category as Inuit and Metis. I think the other communist party made it more central, but I don't recall them running a candidate in my area and since they don't publish an entire novel as their platform they're a bit more accessible too. They also both seem much more about electoralism than revolution (maybe for legal reasons, canada is a fuck), and that doesn't sit well with some people.
Iirc the rules for this party are that party crit happens within the party but a unified party line should be presented and you aren't supposed to speak out about the things not put on the platform if it isn't a question asked of you - or at least if you do it has to be you speaking as you, not you speaking for the party. Its a bit dumb of a rule, understandable to prevent infiltration candidates that just try to sink the party with infighting, but it's very unmarxist to not recognize the need to deal with settler colonialism as a core part of a marxist party in a colonised land.
deleted by creator
Luckily as a Canadian I did not have to vote in such a circus, our choices and results were not better by any means but at least I could vote for only my MP and be aware that my vote wasn't for any imperialist. Was kinda weird though that my local communist party had a shit line on a few key issues and the candidate we had left the party and immediately began uncriticaly repeating some lib shit, but also left for good reasons.
What were the shit lines?
The party is very centralised and didn't include indigenous rights as a large enough part of the platform, it was however still very much there and still a much better take than any major party had (actually called genocide what it was rather than just hand wave it as 'the past'), just was also weird that there was a very "nation-centric" focus that often placed english in quebec in the same category as Inuit and Metis. I think the other communist party made it more central, but I don't recall them running a candidate in my area and since they don't publish an entire novel as their platform they're a bit more accessible too. They also both seem much more about electoralism than revolution (maybe for legal reasons, canada is a fuck), and that doesn't sit well with some people.
Iirc the rules for this party are that party crit happens within the party but a unified party line should be presented and you aren't supposed to speak out about the things not put on the platform if it isn't a question asked of you - or at least if you do it has to be you speaking as you, not you speaking for the party. Its a bit dumb of a rule, understandable to prevent infiltration candidates that just try to sink the party with infighting, but it's very unmarxist to not recognize the need to deal with settler colonialism as a core part of a marxist party in a colonised land.
Is this the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) or the Communist Party of Canada?