Not Good Enough, Ms. Wente
June 14, 2005 · By Max West
One trick journalists use to spin the news is to avoid asking obvious questions. When a columnist – whose job is not just to report the news but also to analyze it – fails to ask “why?”, she’s not doing her job. Or, more precisely, she’s doing a job on you.
Margaret Wente is far from the worst Globe and Mail columnist, but she’s an Ontarian so there are some truths she’s not willing to tell. How to avoid inconvenient truths? Just don’t ask the question. It’s prevarication by omission.
Faced with the unmentionable fact of Ontario’s anti-Western bigotry, Wente tries the “I’m your friend, I’m just telling you” line. In her column today, she writes:
My Western friends blame Ontario for Mr. Harper’s problems in the polls. According to them, it’s all our fault that his popularity has plummeted…. The truth is that Mr. Harper has reverse charisma. The more people see of him, the less they like him…. So here’s what I say to my dear Western friends: Don’t shoot me. I’m just the messenger. I agree that we’ve probably got the worst government in a generation.
Let’s leave aside the smug assumption that if her Toronto acquaintances have a certain view of Harper, then all Canadians must do so too. Even Ms. Wente can be a bit of a T-hole sometimes.
The question that she does not want you to think about is, why? Why do Ontarians feel that way? If the choice turns only on the trivial matter of Harper’s alleged charisma versus “the worst government in a generation,” why won’t Ontario vote for him?
“Reverse charisma” is just a way of saying you don’t like someone. It may look like an explanation but it isn’t, because it’s circular: you don’t like Stephen Harper because you don’t like him. The truth — and Wente is too smart not to know it — is that Ontarians just won’t vote for a leader from the West. It’s anti-Western prejudice and nothing more.
Tell the truth, Hogtown Peggy: The Ontario media created an image of Harper that your Ontario customers wanted to see. You willingly fed the prejudice of Ontarians against any leader from the West. You played up a negative image of Harper — your column today contains more examples — and your audience eats it up because it’s what they want to believe. And it’s not the first time you’ve done it.
Don’t you remember how your paper and the rest of the Ontario media treated Preston Manning when he first showed up from the West? You treated him like a rube, making fun of his voice, his haircut and his glasses. So he tried to play along by changing those things — and you mocked him for changing his appearance.
And don’t try to claim that it’s really about ideology. Here’s what academic analysts found in the data on Manning’s failure in Ontario in the 1997 election, as reported in your own newspaper:
Why did Reform fail here? One plausible explanation is that the cluster of political, social and economic ideas advanced by Reform is not attractive to Ontarians. Reform stands for fiscal conservatism, moral traditionalism and talking tough to Quebec; perhaps those attitudes just don’t fit the Ontario profile.
As it turns out, however, those attitudes do fit Ontario, at least roughly. The authors of Unsteady State [the academic book containing these findings] found that Westerners and Ontarians are essentially indistinguishable in their views on deficit reduction and tax cuts. Although proportionally there aren’t as many moral traditionalists here as in the West, the differences are not massive. And while Ontarians are more likely to accommodate Quebec, the difference between Ontarians and Westerners is “surprisingly small.” With the exception of NDP voters, just about everybody in Canada seems to have drifted to the right since 1993, including most Ontarians…. If not ideology, then what? For one thing, Ontarians don’t much care for Preston Manning. (”Why Ontario resists Reform” by Robert Vipond, G&M, July 21, 1999)
What’s that? Oh yeah – if it wasn’t ideology, it must have been the charisma thing again. Manning just didn’t have the right personality. He just somehow didn’t seem like one of us….
It’s not personality. It’s not ideology. It’s because — and only because — Manning and Harper are from the West. Tell the truth, Margaret Wente.
Max, your paranoia medication’s not working too well these days, is it?
Manning was actually gaining quite a bit in Ontario - until the newly formed Alliance ate him for lunch. He was growing nicely into the role of Leader of the Opposition, and building a base of credibility in Central and Atlantic Canada.
Since then, the Conservatives have had Stockwell Day, and Stephen Harper who both bungled every opportunity to gain monumentally.
Trust is earned - and so far the CPC hasn’t managed to build a lot of trust with voters outside of Alberta. (and some parts of BC)
Ontario would have voted for Harper in favour of Martin last election - except for a few wing-nuts in the CPC opening their traps and giving the Liberals enough ammunition to play the ‘hidden agenda’ card so very effectively.
OTOH: In hindsight you’re vision is myopic. Ontario demanded a new leader for the ‘new party’. All you put forward though was Tom Long, who had dead people voting for him. If Preston Manning had been re-elected the complaint would have been: ‘It’s still the old Reform Party with a new name.’
OTOH: Who are these wing nuts? People like Rob Merrifield who agreed with Paul Martin in saying that counseling should be provided to women seeking abortions. The Globe and Mail and other outlets turned that comment into a media circus, while giving Paul Martin a free pass for saying the same thing a day or so earlier.
If Merrifield is a wing nut, then so is Martin. Then why do Ontarians like Liberal wingnuts? (**** WARNING: this is a rhetorical question ****)
1) DJeffrey - It doesn’t matter _who_ demanded a “new leader” - the point was the party ousted a man who was actually growing into the role rather effectively. You are correct that ‘Reform in a new skin’ criticism would have come forward, but I think Manning was better equipped to overcome that (than either Day or Harper has proven to be).
(BTW - I said _NOTHING_ about Tom Long)
2) Tom - it only takes 1 person (yes, Merrifield was one case, there were a couple of others whose names escape me at the moment) to remind people of some of the loonier assertions of past incarnations of the party. (From notables such as Art Hanger - among others)
3) My point was all about voter trust. It’s not that Ontarians “like” Liberal Wingnuts any better than other varieties - so much as a matter of “the devil you know”. The Reform/Alliance past of the CPC has a perceived degree of radicalism on social matters that doesn’t play well in the ‘416′ region. Like it or not, the CPC _HAS_ to find a way beyond that past, and it can only do so over time - by being consistent, transparent and constructive. Eating its leadership regularly doesn’t exactly lend an appearance of stability and consistency - things necessary to construct a postive brand image.
Ontario is to the present Conservatives what Alberta is to Liberals in this regard - in both cases, the party has a lot of negative history to overcome to make real gains. (Alberta’s _still_ hypersensitive to the NEP, some 25+ years later) Notably, it is possible to make forward progress - after all, Brian Mulroney did ride the PC ticket to two majorities.
OTOH: In principle, I agree that the CPC needs to overcome a lot of hostility and distrust. But at what cost? Moreover, does the CPC help itself by presenting itself as Liberal-lite. And while there’s no point complaining about media double-standards, they still exist.
Here’s where the CPC can help itself, including its socons. Instead of adopting a “sky is falling” rhetoric, its leaders would be better off promoting an ethic of responsibility and patriotism. Tell Canadians that the Liberals hang onto their shoulders like a dead albatross, that the sclerotic regulatory and politically correct regime isn’t true to the dreams and aspirations of middle class Canadians who want freedom understood as “ordered liberty,” not dependency that licentiousness breeds.
As for NEP, Alberta needs to be vigilant, not “hyper-sensitive” against NEP because the majoritarian/imperialistic constitution makes Alberta and other “regions” vulnerable to the predations of the center. Unlike James Madison whose Virginia Plan gave Americans a rep-by-pop House and a rep-by-state Senate, Sir John A. gave us an Ontario-Quebec House of Commons and Senate so the center could control the “regions.”
Conservatives think that a party can protect western interests.
They are wrong.
Tom,
Fundamentally, I agree with you.
What is often seen as “predatory” actions from Central Canada is usually borne not out of malice, but out of ignorance.
My experience has been (time and again) that Central Canadians often do not have any idea about Western Canada (or Atlantic Canada for that matter). Equally, I find that the converse is true as well - Western Canadians have a tendency to badly misunderstand Central Canada as well.
The NEP was a piece of legislation reflective of a different era and vision of Canada. The legal environment today would not allow another NEP to stand for any length of time. (I believe the original NEP died under scrutiny before the courts in a lawsuit launched by Alberta’s then-Premier Peter Lougheed - but my memory’s hazy on the specifics).
While I agree that changes to our legislative bodies would be a good idea, I’m realistic enough to realize that it’s not going to happen anytime soon. That means that the CPC has tough job to do for the foreseeable future.
They do themselves no favours appearing to be “Liberal-lite” (as you so nicely put it). The challenge is to present a different, but positive vision of Canada. So far, in the Reform/Alliance incarnations, the party has not done this - choosing instead to focus on a “going to hell in a handbasket” presentation. (Very bad brand identification indeed) Under Harper, the party has done little different. {Although, creditably, the policy convention came down much more balanced than I had anticipated, but the party has not been very successful in playing those cards up}
The reality is that a regionally focused party is inherently hobbled in this country, and will never successfully advance the interests of each region for any length of time. (This includes the BQ - which I argue operates contrary to Quebec’s interests - but that’s a different topic)
OTOH: You don’t get it: The Liberals are a regional party. They are the Ontario party.
The problem of Canada is that one region rules over the other regions. Ontario is the problem and the Liberal’s hegemony is a symptom of that problem — the problem of Ontario’s dominance. Keep your eye on that ball.
OTOH: I think Max has got you there. Which party, the Lib or the CPC is more regional? I do not know the exact division of CPC/Lib seats thoughout the country, but I it would be hard to say the Libs are national party, unless you think that one seat in a region is representative (I am talking about Alberta). The Libs are strong in Ontario, and pick up a smattering of seats in each region across Canada. I would not call this a national party.
It seems to me that, at this point, Canadian politics has 3 regional parties and only the NDP are national. However, they are only national in that they reflect the desires of their controlling interest groups (big unions, homosexuals, wacky environmentalists, etc) which tend to the urban areas of all regions.
Although I am a born again Albertan (from Ontario), I am not sure I agree with the oft-expressed Ontario bias to Western leaders on thsi blog. However, it sure has been a long time since we had a sucessful Canadian PM from anywhere other than Quebec.
Max: How many Vancouver ridings do the Liberals hold? Where do they stand in the popular vote?
MB: I think the anti-Alberta bias among Ontario opinion leaders (i.e., Globe and Mail) is much strong than what one might find among normal Ontarians, who, like Albertans, have better things to do than to think about people a few thousand kilometers away. They seek to protect their own interests, which is reasonable enough.
The problem is 2-fold. First, the opinion makers tell them their interest, or at least how it relates to the other parts of the country. Second, the interests of Ontarians may very well differ insurmountably from those of the West. Though, I notice today that Dalton McGuinty won’t shut down a coal plant which suggests some overlap between Ontario and Alberta in terms of energy production (and possibly Kyoto, though less likely there).
Tom: The Liberals and NPD do well in the inner city neighborhoods, which are full of urban liberals, and they also do well with the stoners, the ethnic communities and the gays. And they do especially well with the stoned ethnic gays, who by law in BC are allowed to vote three times. But once you get into the suburban communities and up the Fraser valley, it’s pretty much all Conservative. So it depends what you mean by Vancouver.
But all parties have at least a smattering of support in all regions. The question is, where is their base? Which region gives them their real numbers? Where do they dominate? For the Liberals, it’s only Ontario.
Next time, they’ll do even better in Ontario and worse in all the other big provinces because the regionalism of the country will harden. It’s a self-reinforcing dynamic in which each party has to play more and more to its base. And in the West, there are a lot of ridings where the Liberal candidates had better door-knock with a bodyguard.
MB: As an ex-Ontarian (and we applaud your taste), would you disagree that Ontarians often tend to feel, at least a little, that the old part of the country is the *real* part of the country? That for historical reasons, Ontario is more essential to Canada than, say, Alberta or BC? That Canada would still be Canada if Alberta or BC left, but it just wouldn’t be Canada anymore if Ontario were to disappear up it’s own — sorry, if Ontario were to leave?
Over my lifetime I’ve met many dozens — maybe hundreds — of Ontarians and an awful lot of them (insert usual proviso here about exceptions to every rule) have at least a little bit of a ‘tude. I’ve heard toothless welders from Brantford say, “You just don’t got no culthure out here.” You don’t see it?
The problem is the historical culture of Ontario, and not just their opinion leaders. The G&M news and editorial writers have maybe 50 or 100 votes in total, but it’s the population of Ontario that will reject the Conservatives as long as they’re led by a Westerner. The opinion leaders play to the anti-Western prejudice, and they share it, but they didn’t create it.
Max,
I cannot argue with your points. However, it is hard to label millions of people as having a certain attitude. I fear that our own perceptions are colouring our attitudes towards them. I understand what you are saying and I might “feel” that it is true, but feeling is what the lefties do. We on the right like to reason and think. I am not ready accept your points as true just yet.
However, good points about CBC bias. If it is true that Ontarians consider themselves “true” Canadians and us westerners second class citizens, CBC media bias may have something to do with it.
Just a little story about myself, when I was in my early 20’s and in university (in Ontario), a good friend of my was from Lethbirdge and we used to discuss federal politics. I would always razz him about the Reform party with such off-the-cuff statements as “Aren’t they Nazis?” Of course I was joking, but the real bite of the joke was that I was reflecting the Central Canadian attitude towards that western party.
I know this does not reflect well on me and actually strengthens your argument with more anecdotal evidence, but what the hey.
P.S. I am a born again Albertan, not an ex-Ontarian. If you insult me like that again, I may have to put on my cowboy hat and boots, get my gun, get in my truck and drive to your house to “discuss” it further with you.
MB: Sorry to slander your roots by error. As for generalizations, you’re right, but it’d be boring to write “generally speaking” and “exceptions to every rule” all the time. I’ll leave it to readers’ common sense to know that. Anyhow, even if it’s true that some Ontarians are sometimes able to resist the influence of Ontario-centrism, it’s nonetheless pervasive in their culture.