There is no question that the NDP seems to have gotten up off of its death bed with the election of Jack Layton as leader. Layton’s voice resonates in a way that his predecessors’ couldn’t. The party’s electoral prospects have taken a turn for the better as a cohort of activists from a number of different places are returning to what seems to be a rejuvenated social democratic project. As well, the party is taking advantage of a fortuitous realignment in the other mainstream parties, as it can present itself as a home for “liberal” Liberals orphaned by Paul Martin’s lurch to the right and the apparent free fall caused by the recent corruption scandal.

To be fair, Layton has put forward some positive things: he gives prominence to urban issues and the environment and has made some key public pronouncements on relations with the US, foreign policy, war and a host of other areas, including proportional representation. In a Federal election, he could certainly highlight all kinds of issues in a way that we haven’t seen in the past 15 years or so.

This has both positive and not so positive effects on the fortunes of the anti-capitalist and socialist left. Raising concerns about free trade, further integration with the US and the deterioration of our cities can heighten the consciousness of people on these issues. This creates potential openings and helps legitimate concerns raised by the socialist left. As well, for better or for worse, unions and social activists often have an interest in using a party like the NDP to help publicize their issues and push for necessary and needed (although limited), reforms.

But there also is something else happening here. Layton has tapped into a deeply held desire by some to hold onto a cherished icon of mainstream Canadian politics. It’s almost like a desperate hope that mainstream politics itself – a politics that promises instant “success” without organizing necessary struggles or posing any of the fundamental questions we know should be asked – can be the vehicle to challenge the right in this country. Others vainly seek some kind of electorally based united front of progressive forces to speak out against neo-liberalism, hoping that the NDP can play that role. But this misreads both what neo-liberalism is and what social democracy is in the 21st century.

The entire social democratic project has undergone a fundamental realignment. It unquestionably accepts private accumulation and competition as the only possible form of society and has, in most instances, sought to distance itself from too close an identification with the working class.

Every recent social democratic government in the world, including Canadian NDP provincial governments and the PQ in Quebec, along with their liberal and conservative counterparts, has ruled as a neo-liberal one.

Neo-liberalism is more than a set of policies: it is a system of class power that transcends particular governments.

Layton’s NDP is no exception. The party’s distance from power may allow it to appear more left and activist-oriented at times, creating a space that a number of progressive individuals have sought to take advantage of. But the party establishment remains firmly in the saddle – with the likes of Ed Broadbent and Alexa McDonough as public spokespeople – and its underlying ideology is clear. We could hardly expect any real challenge to neo-liberalism or capitalist globalization from an elected NDP government.

A socialist project is still in the necessary stage of reformation. We need to figure out what a multi-tendency, democratic socialist party would look like. Now that it is clear that both the social democratic and “democratic-centralist” types of parties that dominated the 20th century are no longer appropriate ways of organizing for social transformation, space has been created for us to build something new. A necessary part of this effort is a sober assessment of contemporary social democracy and the limits of labourism. In this, we have a long way to go.