The state of conservatism in Canada, that’s the topic of tonight’s Byline.
For the last several years, and in two federal elections, we have been told that the Harper government is most right wing government in Canadian history. We’ve been warned of cuts, we’ve been warned how heartless they are.
That’s been an ongoing narrative, not just from the opposition parties, but from most of the consensus media as well.
Harper will cut.
Harper is ideological.
Harper is ultra-conservative.
It simply isn’t true though.
Under pressure from the left and due to a minority government situation the Harper government has become the biggest spending government in Canadian history. They have cut little and expanded much.
That hasn’t stopped the claims that they are ideologically driven, far right yahoos out of step with Canadian values.
Right now the same is narrative is being played out in provincial elections across the country.
In Ontario Progressive Conservative leader Tim Hudak is being described by the Liberals at Tea Party Tim and there are plenty of reports that link him and the Tea Party.
Really?
Hudak has embraced McGuinty’s all-day kindergarten, his daycare in schools plan, his record levels of health spending and is promising to change very little. That might be why voters aren’t warming up to him.
In Prince Edward Island PC leader Olive Crane is promising a provincial drug program citing the fact that other provinces have one so PEI should as well. How conservative is it to promise that the government will run your drug plan?
In Newfoundland PC leader Kathy Dunderdale is promising to continue a tuition freeze for university, switches some student loans to grants and at the elementary school level expands government daycare across the province.
In Manitoba PC leader Hugh MacFadyen is offering to buy voters with their own money by offering a $100 monthly payment for each kid aged 6-12.
In Alberta the candidates to become PC leader and by default the premier support projects such as government funded light-rail, they back an extension of government control over private land and are generally so afraid of step out with bold conservative ideals that Preston Manning is worried.
Today, Manning the founder of the Reform Party and arguably one of the most influential politicians of the last few decades, is joining Ted Byfield and others to celebrate the 25 years since the rallying cry, The West Wants In was heard.
They are gathering with alumni of the defunct conservative minded magazine Alberta Report to celebrate the changes that have taken place over the last few decades.
And while their achievements are many perhaps it is time for a new slogan.
Conservatism wants in.
We need leaders across the country who are not afraid to say they believe in smaller, limited government. Leaders who are not afraid to tell special interest groups that although their plan sounds lovely and compassionate that it would be better handled by the private sector or by a charity.
We need leaders not afraid to stand for freedom, for property rights two things so closely tied that without property rights true freedom fades and government power rises up.
We need leaders who are willing to acknowledge that humanity is imperfect and no amount of government meddling, social programs or spending can end all of the inequality, injustice or evil in the world.
We need a real conservative alternative in Canada.
And that’s the Byline.
A good way to give “real conservatism” a boost is to deny statists the honourable title of “liberal” or “progressive” (that have been illegitimately hijacked in any event). This would bring the debate back to reality. Otherwhise, the political debate is advantageously framed by statists as being one of generosity and compassion versus calousness and greed.
It is also imperative to show that private initiative and charity function well in the absence of government intervention and provide a real and sustainable alternative to statism.
Also, the fight against the culture of “entitlement” would gain a lot if we would relentlesly identify entitlements as “government imposed charity”. The pride of freedom and self suficiency is nearly extinct in Canada and one way to revive it is to deny the moral equality between the giver and the receiver of the so called “entitlements”.
I am truly impressed by the effort you and your colleagues are making and like many of your viewers feel an incredible relief that we are not as alone or as isolated as we believed ourselves to be before Sunmedia hit the airways.
Seeing, however, the constant refusal to think that surrounds me constantly, I came to the conclusion that there are two debates that need to be won: one rational (that is more likely to engage a small minority still prepared to make that effort) and one subliminal that would slowly turn around and destroy the statiss’ long established monopoly in framing the debate in terms so advantageous to their cause.
I think you are doing a fantastic job on the first one, but could improve much on the second.
Thank you so much for the work you are doing!
CINO = Conservative In Name Only
Harper, Hudak and their ilk are not ideological conservative politicians. They are politicians of convenience. They do what they must to accommodate the status quo bureaucratic political class (AKA public service unions and influential NGOs) The status quo political system in Canada is a form of klepto-economic Looney left pathocracy which is very much politically corrupted at its core institutions. Harper, Hudak and other CINO leaders accommodate this system so they are really part of the problem
Conservative leadership traditionally challenged corruption, injustice. state violation of the individual and extortive taxing – but CINO Conservatives are comfortable with these.
This demonstrates you can’t fight corrupt politics with politicians, you need principled statesmen as conservative leaders to do that task. The last principled Conservative leader we had was Deif the chief. We’re overdue for a real Conservative statesman as a leader.