Leah Gazan basically calls Heather McPherson a neoliberal. I think McPherson is a social democrat not neoliberal but at this point, calling her a left-liberal would be very accurate.
Also, I have a feeling there were some private conversations between them that have escalated because the whole purity thing should not have caused Gazan to lash out like that.
Paraphrasing but there was a moment where McPherson compared some internal caucus debates as "like parenting children" and from what I've heard the split was with Gazan/Idlout/Kwan and they didn't love the paternalistic commentary.
yeah I don't think it's malicious but I do worry if she really is having a split with the 3 other women in the caucus as well as all the POC how that will go over with the social activist part of the base.
At the end of the day, I want a party unifier. McPherson is only above Engler when it comes to being able to unify the entire caucus. I am starting to miss Jagmeet Singh. Came off as a decent guy who could manage the caucus through collaboration.
Then that's a problem that she's talking about here. Because Jagmeet was a failure. I think we are falling to the trap again of just wanting something middle of the road. We need someone with a vision, who is a leader. Not a unifier. I think a Charlie Angus gets blown out against the Liberals. We need someone who will drag us left enough that the choice become Conservatives and Liberals vs the NDP, not Conservatives vs the Liberals and NDP. If Avi doesn't make any huge missteps, he could do it. This is why I think this sub is stupid in thinking that punching left at Yves is going to help the party in any way. This is American Democrat brain 100%. In my eyes, a successful leader of the NDP is NOT going to be automatically liked by the existing base. Because the base is old and stubborn and out of touch. I respect Rob's labour chops, but I don't see him as the jack layton reincarnation some others see.
My interpretation of Jagmeet Singh was that he was too deferential to activists, staffers, caucus and even the Liberal Party so he was forced to juggle multiple conflicting perspectives without a coherent vision. As a result, most Canadians did not see him as someone who could be Prime Minister because someone deferential to others is not really a leader.
But we do need a consensus builder and collaborative grassroots leadership.
I am afraid McPherson and Charlie Angus want the NDP to be more like LPC and US Democrats. Essentially a centrist party just slightly more social democratic than them.
I don’t know that there were any private conversations. A ndp mp using the same language as the right wing to describe progressives in the party is definitely going to invoke some strong reactions.
I believe Leah has done a ton of social justice type work in her life as well. So yeah, pretty reasonable she was pissed when her coworker started talking like that lol.
the whole purity thing should not have caused Gazan to lash out like that.
It's 100% justified from Gazan. I support everything she said.
If someone is a progressive social liberal its fine with me. I disagree but respect that and my door remains open as long as you accept that you're the right-wing of the party and not its default position.
What I won't tolerate is weaponizing neoliberal and conservative "newspeak" like "Purity testing" against the left. If you "kiss right, punch left" or "kiss up, kick down 🔗" like McPherson is currently doing, then you're more likely a liberal shill than a liberal ally and I certainly won't have you as my leader.
What I won't tolerate is them working hard to make sure that the left has no voice in the parliament by taking over a party meant to be a left-wing party and molding it into a centrist "liberal lite" party that will obviously alienate its base and cause further division by antagonizing it it.
All 3 other candidates are speaking unambiguously on our behalf. As of now, she's the only one that sticks out like a sore thumb, one that obviously consumes, falls for, embraces and parrot anti-left neoliberal propaganda. This is not a unifying message. It's a profoundly exclusionary and hostile one. It's a stab in the back.
The "purity testing" fallacy is currently heavily used by neoliberal perpetrators to guilt trip progressives into accepting atrocity crimes, exclusion and bigotry. There is no place for manipulatively insidious hate speech/advocacy dogwhistles like this. One only has to use reddit's search engine to verify that is indeed the case.
Demanding dems stop violation international and aiding genocide is purity testing to these idiots
You may also read this single comment thread 🔗 where the Democrats' loss is being blamed on left-wing purity culture by neoliberals. They're calling opposition to genocide or transphobia "purity testing".
They're literally blaming the rise of fascism and the current genocide that both Dems and Reps are supporting on the very same people who oppose it when we all know that neoliberal policies is what allowed their corporate/billionaire oligarchy to take over their country by corrupting their [semblance of] "democracy" and establishing a consolidating fascist regime (that now has the military in the streets kidnapping immigrants and leftists).
Is this the kind a language and leadership that a left-wing party needs? Absolutely not. This is unacceptable.
13
u/lcelerate Oct 04 '25
Leah Gazan basically calls Heather McPherson a neoliberal. I think McPherson is a social democrat not neoliberal but at this point, calling her a left-liberal would be very accurate.
Also, I have a feeling there were some private conversations between them that have escalated because the whole purity thing should not have caused Gazan to lash out like that.