The Canadian High Tory Tradition And Our New Republican Party

Posted on Thursday, December 18 at 16:31 by sthompson
The recent decision by some in the PC party and most in the Alliance party to merge and create a right of centre republican party of Canada is both a historic move and a short sighted manoeuvre.

The PC party, in Canada, has often been sent to the desert to think about its misdeeds and errors of practical judgement. The Laurier, King, Trudeau and Chretien years are etched in the memory of most.

The Liberals do demand their due when the Conservatives have faltered and failed. But, the reverse and converse are true, also. When the Liberals tripped and tumbled the Conservatives have been there to step into the political fray. The Conservatives have stepped in by being true to the Canadian High Tory Tradition, though. The recent decision by the PC party to ignore, deny and reject its historic vision will neither take them to the victory seat nor endear them to most Canadians. Canadians are not a people who are fond of right of centre political parties, and if Martin is going to tow the Liberal party further right than Chretien then it is not likely Canadians will smile fondly (nor vote for) a national party that is more republican than the Liberal party in Canada seems keen to be.

The last two decades plus have seen, certainly since Mulroney, the language of Canadian conservatism come to be defined, shaped and moulded by the meaning of American republicanism. What is American republicanism? It places high value on a lighter state, less taxes, regionalism, the role of society (often in opposition to the state) and an emphasis on larger military and police to deal with crime and punishment in a swift and lethal manner. The close alliance of Bush and the Alliance party must be duly noted; it is no accident that Harper genuflected so dutifully to Bush and his invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. It does not take much perception to note and notice the way the Alliance party salutes and doffs the cap to such an agenda. The USA is the great, good place and the embodiment of all that is noble and liberty loving in this runaway world.

The Canadian High Tory Tradition has, from the beginning, been wary and suspicious of both American republican principles and American imperialistic ambitions. Canadian Tories, unlike the Liberals, have never been as keen to bow the knee to Uncle Sam to the south of us. The Canadian High Tory Tradition has had an abiding passion for the common good of this nation and the role of the federal government in protecting such a good. Citizenship within such a perspective means being concerned with the good of one and all both within Canada and on the much larger international political stage.

Stephen Leacock, in his much loved Canadian classic, Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town (1912), said ‘In Canada I belong to the Conservative party’. When Leacock thought conservative, what did he think? Leacock finished his doctoral thesis in 1903, and the topic of the thesis was ‘The Doctrine of Laissez Faire: A Critical Essay on The Evolution of Theory and Practice in Reference to the Economic Functions of the Modern State’. The title, of course, is rather long winded and rather Victorian, but Leacock was no fan of ‘laissez faire’. How would Leacock view the Alliance party and their support of free trsde? He would certainly not see them as conservative.

In fact, in the 1911 election, Leacock worked overtime to oppose the Liberal Prime Minister, Wilfred Laurier (who held high the notion of free trade and annexation with the USA). Is this the sort of conservative that would support the merger of the PC party and the Alliance party? I don’t think so!

Leacock walked the extra mile to assist and support most of the founders of the League for Social Reconstruction (LSR) in Montreal in the 1930s when McGill University attempted to banish such folk.

The LSR and CCF were forerunners of the NDP. What kind of conservative was this? It is important to note that the High Tory Tradition in Canada has often had much affinity with important aspects of the political Left. Leacock was not an exception to this rule. He was at the centre and core of it.

Leacock’s My Discovery of the West (1937) was written as a frontal assault on the Social Credit party. The Social Credit party was the forerunner to the Alliance party. It does not take too many connecting of the dots to realize that Stephen Leacock would have little or no interest in a merger of the PC party and the Alliance party.

Canadian High Tories (or Conservatives) are not the same as American republicans, and, when such a merger occurs, either the Tory or the republican must go. The recent merger has banished the Canadian High Tory. Most Canadian Tories would rather vote Liberal or NDP than Alliance. The Canadian PC party could have been rebuilt by saying a firm NO to the Alliance party, then recreating and rebuilding the PC party to the left of Martin. Such a rebuilding would have drawn social liberals in the Liberal party and social democrats in the NDP. Leacock, I suspect, would be pleased with such alliances.

Leacock said, ‘In Canada I belong to the Conservative party’. Leacock, as a good Canadian High Tory and Conservative, understood what these terms meant in a very different way than the language is used today.

The more Canadians are drawn into the orbit and gravitational field of the American empire, the more they will forget their own unique and indigenous traditions. This is what it means to be a colonized people, and there is always a comprador class to facilitate such a transition. The merging of the PC party and the Alliance party, and the equally worrisome leadership of Paul Martin in the Liberal party, is part of the comprador class in Canada furthering the colonization of the True North. I conclude with a quote from Shakespeare: what new hell is this?

---
Ron Dart teaches in the Dept. of Political Science and Philosophy at the University College of the Fraser Valley in Abbotsford, B.C. He is editor of The Red Tory Review and has published numerous articles and two books of poetry. Dart is also the political science advisor to the Leacock Home/Museum in Orillia.

Contributed By


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Fri Dec 19, 2003 4:10 am
    The real name of the new Conservatives should have been the new Hoarders Party of Canada.

    That is what they do, represent those that hoard the money. They are so far right, I hope I am long dead before they ever come to power. They are the most disgusting, greedy, heartless bunch of characters that I have ever seen, they could be even further right than the almighty Dubya, himself. They fawn over the American idea of money rises to the top, and stays there.

    Give me, and the rest of Canada a break !!

    I am at a loss for words when it comes to the new CCConservatives.





    ---
    "Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
    Jim Callaghan
    Minden, Ontario
    705-286-1860
    www.misterc.ca

  2. Fri Dec 19, 2003 6:25 am
    It`s true, but Paul Martin`s fiberals aren`t much, if any, different than these new corporate fascist repugnantans! Who`d have thought that politicians would regress to this type of engineered serfdom in the 21st century!

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  3. Fri Dec 19, 2003 7:05 am
    You bet, that\'s Paul Martin\'s style, too.

    You should have heard Ed Broadbent raking Martin over the coals. It will be a noisy election, I can hardly wait !!



    ---
    "Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
    Jim Callaghan
    Minden, Ontario
    705-286-1860
    www.misterc.ca

  4. Fri Dec 19, 2003 3:50 pm
    Yeah, I`m glad Broadbent is back! I`m looking forward to a noisy election. I was afraid that after Martin`s coronation, we`d have no noise, like the last election, where Mc Donough`s NDP were quite docile, and the Alliance were no alternative. The PC`s of course, thanks to Mulroney, were irrelevant. So in a sense, over the past few years, the Liberals won by default! THERE WAS NOBODY TO CHOOSE FROM!

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  5. Fri Dec 19, 2003 6:36 pm
    Conservatives are finally uniting and Canadians can sigh a deep breath of relief. Regardless, of your political stripe you must admit this is exciting. Our collective focus should be on how this new Conservative Party will truly be a big tent party. Sure there will be those who like David Orchard claim to be fighting for the preservation of institutions like the Canadian Wheat Board but frankly I find his arguments counterproductive.

    David, why shouldn’t we come together? Over the last few years the Canadian Alliance has gradually reformed their policies to look more and more like the Progressive Conservative Party. If you look at economic policy, foreign affairs or defence it reveals little difference. For goodness sake the Alliance even has an un-elected Senator in the caucus. We wouldn’t have allowed that in 1993 or 1997 for that matter. The Canadian Alliance has reformed in order to attract a broad base of support in the name of conservatism. Both parties advocate an elected senate, abolishing the billion-dollar gun registry, plus a host of other policies that are similar. The common ground is a solid foundation and worth fighting for and expanding upon.

    Of course the biggest challenge in bringing the two parties together is ego. All those PC jokes about holding their caucus meetings in Jean Charest two seat sports car in 1993 will certainly come back to haunt Reformers. But we meant it in a good way; Elsie and Jean were always welcome to join our caucus. Besides Jean Charest is a Liberal now.

    Being conservative means something and the roots of conservatism lies in our western heritage. My grandfather, Reverend Dr. Thomas Hart came from Scotland after the first war he tackled the Canadian western frontier. He raised a family and he believed in hard work and ethical practices. He provided for his family and always helped those in need in his community. He believed in self-reliance and felt a hand up was of greater value than a hand out. Simply put, he cared. Westerners are by nature conservative and we should be proud of that fact. These attributes give us our entrepreneurial western spirit.

    David Orchard’s plea to destroy this agreement in principle is misguided. I will not participate in his quest to destroy a process that brings like minds, hopes and the aspirations of a nation together. The process is important and we should be vigilant when it comes to democracy and the strain associated with the tight timelines of this agreement. But, failing in this important work is not an option.

    Certainly the majority of Canadians have embraced this agreement in principle because it is an extremely positive development. Two spirited conservative parties coming together in order to defeat the Martin/Chretien Liberals. Some are jokingly calling this a civil union between Steven and Peter. It is most certainly can be characterized as Canada’s first - same party merger.


    Jim Hart is government relations’ consultant and Former Parliamentarian he can be reached at: jim@hartadvantage.com

  6. Fri Dec 19, 2003 7:47 pm
    I`m not excited at all. I`m not fooled by the notion that somehow this merger provides an alternative to the apathy and arrogance of the liberals. I respect your opinion, Mr.Hart, but this isn`t conservatism that Canada knew in the early to mid 20th century. And yes, given that my political stripe is painted on the left hand side, this doesn`t mean that I don`t celebrate the fruits of hard work or self-sufficiency. What left of centre social democracy is about, is erecting a system where everyone, not just the rich, are rewarded for their labour. It is a system where we recognize that life is a lottery, therefore social programs like universal public health care are there to protect us from losing what we`ve worked for, when something wicked this way comes! Social democracy takes away the excuses one has for not being self-sufficient. But right wing politics only enriches the already wealthy, at the expense of everyone else. And today`s liberal-conservative-alliance axis is goal oriented toward Canada`s absorption by the USA. When the NDP returns to a Tommy Douglas like stance, or when the Canadian Action Party becomes big enough to be a contender, then I will be excited! I`ve grown tired of having corporate fascists hold a gun to my head! Today`s oligarchy-plutocracy is just like midieval monarchy, only with a more global outreach, and better, more sophisticated weapons to back it up!

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  7. Fri Dec 19, 2003 9:09 pm
    Thanks for the comment Mr. Hart. Being this site's militant right winger, I am excited at the conservatives getting together. Finally there is a chance to reduce the size of the Liberal majority, perhaps even to the opposition side of the house.<p> Dave and I rarely agree on things, but we enjoy the debate :). While he doesn't seem to agree with anything the conservatives stand for, I do agree with some of the Lefts' stance on social policies, but few of their fiscal policies. I see the new conservatives as being more a step to social conservatism than the former Alliance. The merger is a balance between the <a href='http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/comment/story.html?id=0b16eb79-cea7-4884-b870-cab29136a40d'>values</a> of what the Alliance grew out of, and what the Tories were. It's too bad that the unfair reputation of some Tory and Alliance members will be transferred to the new party. Much like CBC reporting "the new conservative party of Canada, without a constitution, without policies, today released their new logo.." like they expect a house under construction to be fully furnished, many have already condemned this new party before it's begun.<p> Paul Martin has put on hold waste in the government, commited himself to healthcare funding and military helicopters. He has appointed many westerners to cabinet positions, a move he claims will be good for the West. I see it as good for the cabinet ministers. I still remember the 'Red Book'. I'll believe it when I see it in my wallet. <p> <p>---<br>"History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme" Mark Twain

  8. Fri Dec 19, 2003 9:57 pm
    Hoarders - like it, how about: Cheap Labour Conservatives

  9. Sat Dec 20, 2003 6:49 am
    Well, doc, I guess I should list some of the things that I do agree with that are traditionally considered advocated by the right: 1.- Beef up Canada`s military. We have to protect ourselves! We can`t expect the USA to protect us without being bullied. Not to mention, for purposes of peacekeeping, our military MUST be properly equipped! This does not mean I`m a war monger, it`s only common sense that anyone, or anything, be able to protect itself and stand on it`s own two feet. 2.- Tougher sentences for violent criminals who kill in cold blood (self defence excluded), and much tougher sentences for rapists and pedophiles. No explanation needed here, eh? 3.- I would like to see some sort of proportional representation. Atleast something a little different. For instance, when the Ontario NDP gained on their popular vote, but lost a seat, this wasn`t exactly fair. 4.- Yeah, I`m not fond of an appointed anything, let alone an appointed senate. Some would argue that an elected senate would be an Americanization of Canadian politics. I wouldn`t have a problem with an elected senate. After all, appointments do seem to put the politics out of reach of the public. If not an elected senate, then perhaps scrap the senate, and the taxpayers can save on paying these guys. In some form, give all say to the power of the elected. To me, an elected senate doesn`t threaten Canada, but many of the other policies contained within the platforms of the liberals and the new conservatives do threaten Canada`s existence. When I see things like NAFTA, privatize here, cut cut there, among other things, that`s why i`m totally turned off by right wing politics.

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  10. Sun Dec 21, 2003 6:20 pm
    I\'m sorry, Jean Charest is no liberal. He is going to do to Quebec what Mike Harris did to Ontario.

    He WAS a federal Tory, don\'t forget. He wants to cut taxes, bust unions, raise the day-care from $5 to $7, he wants to contract out jobs, so how the hell can you call him a liberal ??

    Wrong !!

    ---
    "Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
    Jim Callaghan
    Minden, Ontario
    705-286-1860
    www.misterc.ca

  11. Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:15 pm
    Yeah, if they`re looking to re-ignite a separatist movement in Quebec, it looks like Charest could do exactly this! Quebeckers are saying that they didn`t elect this guy to do what he`s doing. Another case of promise this, but get THAT! Why do politicians falsely believe that if the majority votes for them, then this gives them the \'mandate\' to do whatever they want?

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  12. Mon Dec 22, 2003 10:20 pm
    He IS a Liberal, because Liberals closely resemble Tories these days. Tories haven\'t protected our sovereignty and been progressive for 30 years.



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.



Latest Editorials

more articles »

Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news