Jump to content

Talk:Conservatism in Canada

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BrainRepair (talk | contribs) at 15:08, 28 May 2007 (Neoconservatism in Canada). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Now that Conservatism in North America has been split into American conservatism and Canadian conservatism, the following material from the former article obviously belongs here. I think it already is here, but I am not familiar enough with Canadian conservatism to judge. Therefore, before deleting it from the American conservatism article, I've copied it below, where those interested can integrate it into the current article if they like. Rick Norwood 18:48, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In Canada, conservatism followed British tradition well up into the 1980s, when the leadership of Prime Minister Brian Mulroney brought with it Reagan-style economic liberalism and free trade. Afterwards the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada changed to moderately favouring economic continentalism as opposed to the economic nationalism that it had previously promoted. However, many Canadian conservatives continued to favour the traditional Red Tory ideology of supporting economic independence (protectionism) and preservation of existing political and cultural institutions. At the same time, many "small-c" conservatives in Canada (especially in the western provinces) abandoned the PC Party to join the outspoken western activist Preston Manning and his Reform Party of Canada, which advocated even greater laissez-faire economic policy and stronger social-conservatism. In 2003, Canada's oldest political party (the PC Party) was disbanded and controversially merged with the Canadian Alliance (the descendant of the Reform Party) to create the new Conservative Party of Canada. The new party is arguably right-wing or neoconservative, although in early 2005, its political platform had yet to be fully developed, due to an election called by Liberal Party of Canada Prime minister Paul Martin in 2004. Although the new party increased its number of seats in parliament during the 2004 election, from 72 combined PC and Alliance seats to 99, its combined vote dropped significantly from 38% to only 29%, indicating that many Progressive Conservative voters did not vote for the new party. Recent polls have indicated that the new party is still haemorraging support thanks largely to their leader Stephen Harper and the extreme social conservative platform that the party advocates. The old Canadian conservative divide between Blue Tories (so-called "neoconservatives" and libertarians, mostly from the richer western provinces) and Red Tories (so-called "moderate" conservatives, mostly from Ontario and the poorer eastern provinces) is not as strong in the new party: most of the old PC Party's most prominent Red Tories, such as former Prime Minister Joe Clark, anti-free trade activist David Orchard, former Quebec Member of Parliament (MP) André Bachand, openly gay MP Scott Brison and others chose to oppose the merger and not join the new party.


Title

Why is this article called "Canadian Conservtism" and not "Canadian conservatism"? Is it about conservatism as a political ideology, or about Conservative parties only? Ground Zero | t 15:05, 18 February 2006 (UTC) Reviewing the article further, I see that it includes the BC Liberal, the ADQ, BU Unity, the Progressive Canadian Party, and so on, so it is not about Conservative parties, but about conservative parties. I will move the article accordingly. Ground Zero | t 19:34, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to Bloc Quebecois

I have removed a part of a paragraph making mention of the Bloc Quebecois. It seems to have been included because they may have a few conservative-leaning ideas and particularly because it has a handful of former Progressive Conservatives who joined the party. However, for all intents and purposes the Bloc Quebecois is regarded in Canada as a moderately democratic socialist group, and you would be hard-pressed to find any political commentator who would have any major disagreement on that point. Conservatives who joined the party did so mostly because they were interested in the sovereignty effort. Derekwriter 19:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

strange misuse of 'neoconservative'

This article repeatedly uses the word neoconservative in a manner that appears to be idiosyncratic, and not in keeping with its usual definition (for which see our article on the topic). The Reform Party of Canada is described here as "neoconservative", for example, which I have never seen before, and at times this article even seem to use "neoconservative" as a synonym for "neoliberal", which is quite seriously confused. --Delirium 11:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this article is extremely biased. I will try to work on it in the next week. Rizla 20:51, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions To Improve The Article

This article requires a more thorough cleanup, as in its current form it inadequately lays out the history of conservative ideology and movements in Canada. Everything should be spelled out clearly, be logically arranged, and defer to a more neutral reading. I'd advise future writer/editors to pay more attention to the following areas:

The ideological roots of Red Toryism and the personalities and policies that defined this uniquely Canadian ideology: how did the likes of Grant and Camp articulate the Red Tory vision, and how was it put into practice by Diefenbaker, Davis, Clark, Lougheed, Roblin and others who engineered social policy?
Expand upon the rise and fall of Mulroney and his coalition of Western populist conservatives, Eastern Red Tories, and Quebec nationalists. What brought these groups together, why did they succeed in capturing back to back majority governments, and why did they fracture along ideological lines into three separate parties following the fall of Meech Lake?
An editor above claims to have excised references to the Bloc Quebecois based on his own personal perception that they are NOW a left-leaning party. It is a gross betrayal of the history of the conservative movement and ideology in Canada to remove them from this article, regardless of their perceived ideological positions now. The Quebec nationalists in the Mulroney PCs overwhelmingly backed the Blue Tory revolution. Why? Someone has to write about the shift from the strong federalism of the Red Tory tradition to the new decentralist attitudes of the Blue Tories, a significant factor in capturing the support of Quebec. Without the support of the Quebec faction of the PCs, Mulroney simply would not have been in power. Mulroney's decentralist agenda was THE compromise issue that kept both the Western and Quebec factions within the party until Meech Lake.
Similarly, in respect to Quebec, one can trace a thread between the old soft-nationalist, social conservative Union Nationale and Ralliement des Creditistes down to the Quebec conservatives in the Mulroney government that later broke off to form the Bloc Quebecois. It was only after the break from Mulroney that the Bloc became a "big tent" party that welcomed sovereignists and nationalists of various political stripes, and there was arguably a drift from conservatism over time.
The section concerning Social Credit needs to be cleaned up, and the ideological differences, and historical trends of the movement in Alberta, British Columbia and Quebec need to be separated more clearly. The Alberta Social Credit party was originally based on social credit theory, and was the heart of Christian conservatism in Canada, inspiring the Reform Party. The British Columbia party, on the other hand, never embraced social credit theory. They emerged as the "free enterprise" successor to the Conservative-Liberal alliance that was formed to keep the CCF from power, a coalition that included moderates, Red Tories and social conservatives. The reference to "staunchly conservative policies" should be removed, as it is both loaded and meaningless.
The way conservative ideology and movements coalesced in the West is certainly more complex than what is represented here. Manitoba, for example, tended toward a very Eastern-style Red Toryism in provincial politics, and often did not share the same populist protest-style conservatism the three other provinces had. Also, while Christian social movements in BC and Alberta were generally conservative and grouped around the SoCreds provincially and the PCs federally, in Saskatchewan and Manitoba Christians tended toward CCF-style social democracy.
I would argue against using the word neoconservative at all in this article, as it never really gained a foothold as a descriptor in Canada. It is rarely used in the media, by political commentators or by activists themselves. It is perhaps completely irrelevant to Canadian politics. Hipsterlady 02:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neoconservatism in Canada

It's easy to identify ideological neo-Conservatives in the United States. They tend to be well educated, and sometimes have affiliations outside of politics. Examples include Irving Kristol, Bill Kristol, (Canadian born) David Frum, Richard Pearle, (Canadian born) David Brooks, Paul Wolfowitz, Allan Bloom, and Leo Strauss.

Who personifies neo-conservatism in Canada?