If you do not enjoy politics please be warned this post is well, almost exclusively about politics.
I read today in the Edmonton Journal that we may be in for a long season of Conservative success at the federal level. The journalist in question pointed out the strength of the Consverative parties current polls and the weakness of opposition leadership. The journalist quoted from a book written by Chantal Hebert the central thesis of which is this Conservative resergence. The difficulty that I have with talk of a Conservative resurgence is the sneeking suspicion that while it might be a resurgence for the Conservative party it is not a resurgence for conservative ideas or ideals. If you look at the policies of the Harper government there is precious little that seperates them from the Martin or Chretien Liberals. A few examples:
1) The Harper government forced Boeing to provide regional offsets and investment in order to win a contract to build military aircraft.
http://andrewcoyne.com/2007/01/senator-porkier.php
2) The Harper government recently announced billions of dollars in subsidies to Canadian farmers. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070309/harper_farmers_070308/20070309?hub=TopStories
3) The Harper government first cut the funding then returned funding to feminist lobby groups. http://shaidle.blogmatrix.com/:entry:shaidle-2007-03-09-0000/
4) The Harper government has announced millions of dollars in subsidies to "green" inititatives in British Columbia. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070313/harper_ecotrust_070313/20070313?hub=Canada
Is that enough examples? I sure hope it is. By definition conservatives believe society functions best with less government and lower taxes. They believe that government programs are a detriment to the free market and in the end not beneficial to the citizenry. They believe that even the environment can benefit from market forces. The problem is that people who vote for the Conservative party are just as fond of government largesse as everyone else. From farmers to small business people from vetrans to the oil companies we are all conservatives when it comes to cutting other peoples programs and lowering our own taxes.
Conservatives cannot champion smaller welfare rolls while at the same time providing billions of dollars in program funding to farmers, it is hypocrisy. If we want to make government smaller we have to be willing to start with programs that help people that vote for the Conservative party. If we are not willing to do that then any Conservative government will always only be conservative in name only.
7 comments:
I've alwasy admired how passionate you are about politics. There'd be a lot more arguements, but probably a better world if every one cared as much as you do.
OH Mike
Ryan will have a grand ol' time with your blog, he is always looking for someone to engage with him in a political rant session.
OH ya, can we add you on our links?
Sure sign me up and trust me that wasn't a rant that was me trying to be reasonable, wait till Dion becomes PM then you will see a rant.
Great post Mike,
I have noticed this trend but I think that it is really just a function of the ideological "convergence" that is Canadian power politics. Unfortunately, the power base in this country is the GTA, you control the GTA you control the country. Harper and his people know this and they are manufacturing policies to appeal to the centrist mentality of the eastern voters.
Environment is a perfect example. Now I'm not saying that to be conservative is to be pro-industry and anti-environment; however, one has to look at Harper's recent green embrace with suspicion. I mean when has Harper ever cared about the environment. This is a political maneuver. Dion is weak right now (not to say that he was ever strong), he has nothing but a history of pro-environmental rhetoric. Cut him off at the knees with pro-environmental policies you will effectively capture the middle of the road voter and destroy the Liberal party. That paves the way to a Conservative majority.
I see these recent policy maneuvers as merely political. It is all about timing. Build good rapport with fair-weather voters, call a spring election, and you've got your majority. They have done this in the past. When do you hear anything about gay marriage anymore? Remember what an issue this was in the Martin election. Harper fulfills his promise to the voters - sure he puts the issue to a free vote in the house but he did it when he knew it didn't have a chance. Perfect strategy; appease the right wing without ostracizing the left. Now the issue is dead, and I don't think it will be revived any time soon.
So I guess the greater question is whether this opportunistic convergence will pay out in the long run. Is it better, from a conservative standpoint, to have a majority government and to make social welfare and redistribution concessions along the way? Time will tell. What is the more interesting question is whether this left migration will continue once Dion is toast and the Conservatives have a majority. If that happens then there is a real ideological problem with Harper.
I am glad you have found the forum for your political discussions.
I agree with most of what you say Ryan. I might quibble about the necessity of having the backing of the GTA pointing out that Mulroney held power with a combination of nascent western Reformers and soft Quebec nationalists but the end result is the same you pander to either GTA or rural Quebec to get your majority and from a policy perspective there is little to choose between them.
This is assuming that if packaged properly and presented with intelligence and zeal most middle Canadians would not find conservatism appealing. That is my core problem with Harper, he does believe in smaller government and lower taxes, look at the guys resume. So why is he so scared of trying to convince the Canadian public that he is right (correct).
There seems to be only two choices either he does not believe that most Canadians are smart enough or sophisticated enough to agree with him, or he believes that he is not a powerful enough leader to convince people of his position. Either one of these options is depressing.
Even if the Conservatives get a majority the worry is that they will do exactly what the Republicans in the US did, fritter away a majority spending on your priorities and helping your friends. I cannot really do the argument vis a vis the US example justice here but read David Frums, "Dead Right" and you will get a better idea of what I am talking about.
I really want to believe that if Harper gets a majority he will enact conservative polices, reigning in spending, cutting programs and lowering taxes. Unfortunately Harper has done precious little to convince me that he has a right wing "hidden agenda". Am I the only one who wishes he did?
Post a Comment