Is Uniting the Left a Good Idea?

Give Stephen Harper credit for one thing, he is driven and he is relentless. It was his opinion and that of Reformist architect Preston Manning (and several other Neo-Con, Western, Evangelicals) that the Mulroney led Progressive Conservative Party of the Eighties didn't speak for them. To them, the PCs were far too "Liberal" in their actions and not representative of Western Canada, specifically Alberta. The Social Credit Party of Ernest Manning, Preston's Father, had all but disappeared and so did the voice of the far-right- Western Separatists. Hence, the creation of the Reform Party of Canada in 1987. It was to this party that a young WASP Evangelical - "Steve" Harper - was attracted and as National Campaign Manager in 1988,  saw him, coin the election slogan "The West Wants In".   

But the Reform Party of Preston Manning could never shake the perception of being a narrow minded,  extremest party despite gaining Official Opposition Status during the Chretien years. It was a purely Western-centric group who couldn't buy a seat east of Manitoba, even after changing it's Name to the euphemistic Alliance Party of Canada. The Alliance's first leader, Stockwell Day, being an adherent of Young Earth Creationism (which holds that men walked with dinosaurs among other such nonsense) proved to be an embarrassment and a huge disappointment. This set the stage for the ascendancy of Steve Harper, the Great Western Hope in 2002. 


It was during the time between the end of the Mulroney years in 1993 and the unification of the "Right" in 2003 that the Progressive Conservatives, or Red Tories all but lost their political voices. The PCs had been reduced to third and fourth party status during the Chretien years and many traditional Tories felt they had more in common with the Liberals than with the bizarre collection of Reformist Neo-Cons from the West. Despite the fact that the Right was fractured between the two political entities, the faltering Progressive Conservatives still preferred to cling to their autonomy and hence their own voice, weak as it was, as opposed to jumping into bed with the Reformists. 

But then the unthinkable happened, The Progressive Conservatives were betrayed by their own leader, Peter MacKay in 2003 who sought merger with the Neo-Cons. But at the time of the merger, the PCs were so weakened that they were gobbled up by the ravenous, power hungry Alliance led by Stephen Harper. Harper and his band of Neo-Cons were then free to appropriate the Conservative name and anoint Harper himself as the savior of the political Right. And by gaining the Conservative name (after promptly dropping the "Progressive" label), Harper and his Western-centric group of radicals now had the illusion of credibility they never had before and were able to fool voters in Central and Eastern Canada into thinking that the Conservative Party of Canada (as the new Reformist abomination came to be known as) was the same Conservative Party of Diefenbaker, Stanfield and Mulroney. 


Many of the old PCs who joined the united Right bandwagon erroneously believed that the Tory voice would once again echo throughout the Halls of Parliament. It was their chance to regain power and to punish and ultimately extinguish the Liberal Party for becoming all too cocky in their belief that they were the "natural" governing party in Canada. But as time has passed, from 2003 until now, and as the Harper led Conservatives have gone from Minority to Majority Government status, it has become all too apparent that the old moderate PCs- the "Red" Tories and the socially progressive Conservatives- have in fact, lost their voices all together. They have been all but choked off by the autocratic Harper and his "Gestapo-like" staff at the PMO. There is one voice and only one voice in the current Conservative Party and that belongs to Stephen Harper. 

Harper controls his party with an iron fist and there is no room what so ever for dissenting voices. Anyone who dares speak out against the government is attacked, discredited, fired and ultimately silenced. Conservative MPs who don't spout the CPC talking points and rhetoric at every turn are "re-educated". This is nowhere as apparent as with the recent passage of bill C-38. Back-benchers such as David Wilks, who expressed any reservation about the monstrously undemocratic bill quickly had their individuality erased and were reduced to "cheer-leader" status during the subsequent voting in the House. 


Harper's performance and the lack of ethical behaviour by his party is beginning to stir up dissent among some grass-roots Conservatives including previous PC Ministers and Provincial counterparts. They know this party that is Conservative in name only (and certainly undeserving of the Tory label which the media has bestowed upon them) does not speak for them.  It is clear to them that the Ideologically driven pro-reformists in the party have no tolerance for political moderates. And though this is still early days as far as the Harper majority goes, the possibility of a palace revolt is not out of the question. At the very least, it could well lead to the political Right becoming splintered once more as Progressive Conservatives seek to distance them selves from the tyrannical Harper.  

Which brings me back to my original statement about unification of the Political Left. It seems to me, and it is only my opinion, that the motivation for unification of the Left is identical to the reasons that saw the political Right become a single entity. The Liberals and New Democrats joining forces would serve one purpose and one purpose only, to overthrow the Harperites - much as the PCs and Alliance came together with the express purpose of deposing the Chretien Liberals. But if the parties of the left do join forces and manage to overthrow King Stephen, then What?? A unified Left would theoretically represent a broad spectrum of people- What Michael Ingatieff referred to as the "Big Red Tent". What would their mandate be? Who's voice would be dominant? Would it be the Centrist Liberals? The more Socialist inclined NDP? Would merger eliminate the Socialist voice in favour of a more corporate friendly entity? And what of the environmentally conscious Greens? 


Personally, I think there is not only room, but an absolute need for all of these so-called "Leftist" voices to be heard in our House of Commons. And yes, I even think there is room for progressive Tories as well. It is called balance, it is giving voice to all Canadian people and their various beliefs. No one segment of society has the right to bulldoze the others in the name of it's own ideology, thinking  that theirs is the only right system of beliefs and that all the others are wrong. Democracy is about consensus building, about doing what is right for the collective, not the selective few. Therefore the more disparate voices that can be heard in the House of Commons, the better. 


If the political Left were seeking to join forces in order to build on their strengths and commonalities, I would be all in favour of it. However, the voices of unification are being raised for one purpose only, to defeat something, to overcome something, to gain power, not to create something better that might be all inclusive. Therefore, I believe the Left should remain the way it is. All the many and varied voices in the vast political tapestry to the Left of Center are far too valuable to be gobbled up and packed into one all encompassing and vague entity just as the Harperites cannot hope to ever speak for all the people who are truly Conservative of one variety or another.

I recommend then, that instead of the parties of the Left joining forces, they should seek to strengthen their identities, hone their messages, reaffirm the values that they hold to be true - and wait. For eventually, the Government of Harper will  self-destruct as more and more grass-roots Conservatives decide they have had enough of the the One Man Band that claims to speak for them. The Political Right will once again divide itself  as those voices that have been suppressed for so long, seek to be heard once again. 

Let's Never Forget Who Stephen Harper Is

Let us never forget fellow Canadians, that "Little Stevie Harper" (pictured above) was a powerful influence upon the radical, western-centric, ideological lobby-group-come-political party along with the hyper-evangelical, free-market, anti government flake, Preston Manning. It was little Stevie "The Wonder-kin" Harper who coined the rather catchy 1988 Reform Campaign Slogan of: "The West Want's In". Into what was never adequately explained, but now it appears that "The West "Owns It".

Harper left the Reform Party in 1992 due to a disagreement with Manning, who was not radical enough for Harper's liking. So Stevie became head of the National Citizens Coalition, a Corporate Canada Lobby group who's name is misleading to say the least, and used their $50,000 in third-party print and media advertisement   to spring-board him back into the Reform Party and into Parliament.

Harper left Parliament in 1997 and in that year, made a speech to the Uber-conservative American Think-tank "Council For National Policy" in which he made the following statements:

-"Canada is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it"

-"if you're like all Americans, you know almost nothing except for your own country. Which makes you probably knowledgeable about one more country than most Canadians", and

-"the NDP [New Democratic Party] is kind of proof that the Devil lives and interferes in the affairs of men."

Gee! Sounds like  Harper has a distinct lack of respect for Canadians and those principles and values that Canadians have come to embrace as defining our unique culture. 

In 2000, Stevie Harper encouraged Alberta to build a "firewall" around itself to protect it from a Canadian Government which he claimed :
"appears content to become a second-tier socialistic country". In 2002, Harper became the leader of the re-branded Reform Party who now referred to them selves as the "Canadian Alliance". They hoped the new euphemistic name would  gather more centre-right votes and credibility east of Alberta. They were wrong.

In 2003, Peter MacKay was elected the last leader of the floundering Progressive  Conservative Party.  He won leadership on the condition that he not negotiate an amalgamation with the Harper Reform/Alliance party. MacKay made this promise then promptly broke it after assuming the P.C. leadership. This Enabled Steve the Reformist to take control Of the Progressive Conservatives. He promptly dropped the "Progressive" moniker and by usurping the Conservative name, The Reform Party was finally able to gain the attention of voters outside of Alberta, not realizing that Harper was a Reformist in Conservative clothing. 

So never EVER forget fellow Canadians, Stevie Harper was, is and will always be a Reform Partyist. The Conservative Party of today, is simply the old Reform Party, re-branded once again.

And in case you've forgotten, Stephen The Reformist Harper believes in:

-Privatizing our health-care system which would result in a multi-tiered health-care system that would see those with the most money able to buy their way to the front of the line of the best health services while the rest of us would have to make do with understaffed, underfunded, feces infested health clinics.

-Privatizing our education system which, like the health system, would create a multi-tiered system with the rich able to purchase the best education and the rest of us making do with substandard materiel and curriculum. We would all be "just" educated enough to run the machines for Corporate Canada. Consider just how
inequitable our current private University system is.

- Union Busting Meaning that all the services listed above would be non unionized with no protection for employees or clients working for substandard wages while delivering the maximum profits to the private companies running them. This would be the same throughout industry. No unions means no employee protection, no minimum wages and few if any employee rights.

- Removal of all government regulations pertaining to Big Banks and Big Business Again, this would give Corporate Canada carte-blanch to do business as it sees fit at the expense of it's employees and each and every natural resource and asset Canada currently protects.

- Removal of all trade barriers which would give huge multi-national corporations free access to all of our assets and resources. It would be an open invitation to big business to come and rape our country and exploit our children.

- Harper Condemned our lack of support for the invasion of Iraq which in his mind, meant that Canada missed out in the wild and wooly privatization of Iraq, it's oil fields, it's  education, it's health care and it's security. So Stevie would have us perpetually at war. We are leaving Afghanistan in time for Libya. This allows Steve to drape himself in the Flag of Canadian Nationalism while being in on the ground floor of the whole-sale privatization of war ravaged countries.  THIS is why Harper wants to buy F-35 jets and increase spending on the military: Not for the defense of the arctic but for U.S./NATO led war profiteering. 

Yes fellow Canadians, this is our friend Stephen the Reformist. We elected him. His intentions are clear. We can either stop him, or allow him to turn us all into a herd of cattle who are being led blindly and passively to the slaughter, all for the consumption of Corporate Canada.