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.

It's time we took back the Right from the extremists and the ideologues.

The Right Wing in Canada no longer represents me.

For that matter, neither does the Left. Our Left Wing parties spend their time chasing each other’s tails as they jockey for position to see who can be top dog on that very tiny hill. It used to be a much bigger hill on the Left, and it was predominantly Liberal- Red in colour. But the Left is so fractured now, and the presence of the Bloc Quebecois usurps many of the red-federalist seats in Quebec.

But the Right is a formidable unified block now that incorporates Red Tories, Blue Tories and every shade of Tory in between. Or does it?

In 2003, Peter Mackay (our current Minister or National Defense) was elected Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada (PC). During the leadership convention, MacKay made a deal with fellow leadership candidate David Orchard. The deal was that Orchard would throw his support behind MacKay on the condition that MacKay would not unite the struggling Progressive Conservative Party with the extreme Right Wing Alliance Party (Formerly the Reform Party of Canada). The deal worked and MacKay won the leadership. He then promptly entered into negotiations with the Alliance Party for unification of the Right. Later that year, Stephen Harper, one of the founding fathers of the Reform Party, was elected leader of the new unified party of the Right, a party born of deceit and betrayal.

From the beginning, the Reform Party of Canada was created as an alternative to the Progressive Conservative Party which was seen to be drifting dangerously close to the ideological centre line. But as it was firmly rooted in the grasslands of Alberta, the Reformists were viewed as more of a territorial party, much like the Bloc Quebecois. In addition, insidious shadows that insinuated racial and religious intolerance, regional biases, and religious extremism emanated from the Reform Parties back rooms. So while they were gaining strength in western Canada, the Reform was never viewed as a viable national party, certainly not one representative of Canadian values.

So the Reform Party tried to reinvent itself. It gathered in a few of the Blue Tories from the struggling P.C.s and redubbed itself “The Alliance Party” and billed itself as THE party of the Right. They elected the stumbling bumbling Stockwell Day (Our current President of the Treasury Board) as leader. But most Canadians were still not buying it. They knew that The Alliance was just the extremist Reform Party under a different name and with a less credible leader. So even as they continued to gain strength in the west, the Reform/Alliance Party could not gain credibility or make  inroads west of Manitoba. But what they did succeed in doing was splitting the vote on the Right, allowing the Liberal Party to continue its run of successive majority governments.

So thanks to the treachery of Peter MacKay, the Reform/Alliance Party succeeded in gobbling up the few remaining P.C.s. To the new party strategists’, this gave them instant credibility. The P.C.s were always strong in the east, being one of the traditional parties of a unified Canada. In addition, Former P.C. Prime Minister Brian Mulroney was from Quebec which gave the P.C.s inroads there. So in the most masterfully strategic stroke in the history of the Reform/Alliance Party, they reinvented themselves yet again, this time taking on the name of the newly annexed party, calling themselves “The Conservative Party of Canada”. The “Progressive” part of the name was instantly dropped, meaning they no longer had to trouble themselves about dancing too close to the “Red” zone. This was a very deep Right Wing group, and now they had credibility, and they were hungry.

Leading up the federal election of 2006, circumstances were reversed from what they were during the Reform/Alliance days. Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien had retired from political life, leaving the Liberal party deeply divided. Not only that, The New Democratic Party was taking on steam and the Bloc Quebecois was poised to pounce on seats vacated by the old Progressive Conservative Party. The Left was deeply divided and the Right was, for all intents and purposes, unified. At the very least, there was only one Party, the newly minted Conservative Party occupying the land to the Right of Centre.

But even though it’s new name gave it credibility, the Reform/Conservatives had still not completely united the right. Joe Clark, the 16^th Prime Minister of Canada and the last leader of the federal Progressive Conservative Party of Canada prior to MacKay  would have nothing to do with what he considered to be a sham of a party. He finished out his Last term as a Member of Parliament sitting as a Progressive Conservative, not a New Conservative. During the 2006 federal election, Clark threw his weight behind the Liberal’s Paul Martin, claiming that he was at least, “The Devil we know”. He continued to characterize the new Conservative party as the “Alliance Take Over”.

But even with such favorable conditions, The Reform/Conservatives were only able to win the 2006 federal election with a minority. While they had gained seats in the East for the first time, not all Social Conservatives would join the new party. Scott Brison, one of the few remaining sitting P.C.s at the time of the annex had thrown in his lot with the Liberals. And just as Joe Clark had said, Paul Martin was at least the devil the voters knew.

And with Stephen Harper’s victory, Peter MacKay was rewarded for betraying the Progressive Conservatives. He was made Minister of Foreign Affairs, a plumb position. The bumbling Stockwell Day was made Minister of Public Safety. While not a high profile position, it was reward enough for stepping aside as leader of the Reform/Alliance Party, allowing Stephen Harper to take the reins and eventually, become the 22^nd Prime Minister of Canada.

So this so-called Conservative Party of Canada, the one currently serving out its second consecutive minority government, is but a very pale shadow of the former Progressive Conservative Party of Canada. This party’s roots are very firmly implanted in the ideology of the old Reform Party.  It has had to temper itself somewhat, compared to the old extremist days. It has been forced through gritted teeth to be somewhat conciliatory regarding the agenda’s of other parties, due to its perpetual state as minority government.  But make no mistake about it, if this bunch of divisive ideologues, representing a party that resulted from betrayal were ever given a majority mandate, there would be no collaboration what so ever.  Harper’s style of autocratic leadership has proven the truth of that. There would be no return to fiscally responsible Government. There would be no governance based on the collective values and social conscience that makes Canada unique.

We will have a country governed according to the far right intolerant narrow minded ideals of an elitist few. And these few are vicious, un relenting, brutal and have an extraordinary survival instinct. They fight dirty and they fight to win. And these my friends are not the tenants of the Conservative Party of our fathers.

Many disagreed with his politics, being a Progressive Conservative, but Brian Mulroney, to the best of his ability practiced responsible government. He managed to clean up the federal deficit left by his predecessor, the late Pierre Trudeau.  He attempted to bring the country together by bringing Quebec into the constitutional fold.  He succeeded in creating free trade in an effort to level the trade playing field with the United State. While it was and is much hated, Mulroney implemented the GST as a way of bringing in more federal revenue while reducing personal income tax. Mr. Mulroney took into consideration, the needs of the country and acted accordingly.

One of Mulroney’s predecessors as leader of the P.C.s, Robert Stanfield, while never actually achieving the status, was called the Greatest Prime Minister Canada never had. He was granted the honorary title of “Right Honorable”, usually reserved for Prime Ministers and he earned the nickname “Honest Bob”.

While his tenure as Prime Minister was short lived, P.C. Prime Minister Joe Clark is today regarded as a great statesman and a scholar.

These are all the perfect example of what it is to be a “Progressive” Conservative. These are people who put the needs of the country ahead of their own agenda, practiced responsible government and were honorable, fair and respected. None of these terms can be applied to the new Conservatives, the Reform Conservatives.  As such, the far ideological right does not represent me. It does not represent a great many Conservative Canadians who believe in tradition, honour, and pragmatism, maintenance of our social safety net, collaboration and responsible government. And being God fearing does not mean being exclusionary. 

It's time we took back the Right from the extremists and the ideologues.