Comments (10) to “Being a Conservative - More Then Just Rooting for the Team”

1. Road Hammer wrote:

   Exactly. The Conformatory party isn’t getting my vote unless they deserve it.

   Posted on 28-Mar-07 at 10:36 am | Permalink

2. canadianna wrote:

   I call myself conservative, and there are a great many changes I would like to see that I don’t believe the majority is ready for yet.

   Forty years of socialism is ingrained on the Canadian psyche. I believe change should happen, but if it’s done with breakneck speed it will cause a backlash.

   Positive, lasting change has to be handled slowly and cautiously otherwise the ’scary’ nonsense comes back and halts any progress.

   Posted on 28-Mar-07 at 11:23 am | Permalink

3. Les wrote:

   we should act conservatively with our changes… To paraphrase Canaianna ;)

   Posted on 28-Mar-07 at 11:36 am | Permalink

4. Opinions Canada wrote:

   […] the shape and substance of a man smoking a pipe in a very dim place - I did not do well at all. Being a Conservative - More Then Just Rooting for the Team— ThePolitic.com Mar 28 13:35 Joel, from ProadtobeCanadian, lowers the boom on those who call […]

   Posted on 28-Mar-07 at 11:40 am | Permalink

5. Shane Edwards wrote:

   I think there was a bit of straw man action in those pieces. I haven’t heard anyone actually advocating a “hidden agenda” approach. I personally see this minority government as an opportunity to show ethics and leadership in government, so people trust the Conservatives to mean what they say and say what they mean. Contrary to what some naysayers maintain, they are doing that. The average Canadian is starting to recognize that Stephen Harper keeps his word and governs well.

   This will bear fruit in a future election, when he runs on a real conservative platform. People will believe him when he outlines his platform. That is what I am looking forward to - running on a real conservative platform and being elected to implement it instead of sneaking it by us.

   Posted on 28-Mar-07 at 1:36 pm | Permalink

6. Kathy Shaidle wrote:

   Can you provide some historical examples to prove this assertion:

   “Forty years of socialism is ingrained on the Canadian psyche. I believe change should happen, but if it’s done with breakneck speed it will cause a backlash.

   “Positive, lasting change has to be handled slowly and cautiously otherwise the ’scary’ nonsense comes back and halts any progress.”

   Would you characterize Margaret Thatcher’s handling of the miner’s strike or Reagan’s similar treatment of the air traffic controller’s “slow and cautious”?

   Like so much on the so-called Canadian conservative web, your assertions sound more like unexamined boilerplate truisms and self-fulfilling prophesies than sound principles. This is the philosophy of professional conservatives for decades. As Dr. Phil would say, “How’s that been workin’ out for y’all?”

   Wimpiness is never inspirational. All most Canadians really care about are their lottery tickets, beer, long weekends, tax refunds and getting a big screen tv anyway. Bold, revolutionary change would likely inspire such drones to rise from their stupors and cheer. The ones who’d object don’t vote or don’t vote conservative anyhow, so screw em.

   Posted on 28-Mar-07 at 1:53 pm | Permalink

7. George Freeman wrote:

   Good point Kathy, but I’m inclined to believe that Central Canada is so overwhelmingly Liberal I don’t know that true blue conservatism is a strategically good place to start. As you said in your recent post on the subject, Conservatives need to try and change the culture.

   Harper has accomplished with his budget:

   1.) Good polling in Quebec and Ontario
   2.) Pissed off conservatives
   3.) Ignited regional grievances against the equalization formula, or non-formula, be it in Newfoundland, Saskatchewan and Alberta.

   I offer that Harper may be proving himself a brilliant strategist in the long term. Here’s why:

   If Conservatives are ever going to change the culture in Central Canada, they have to put into question the very existence of Canada itself—that the far flung “territories” of Central Canada might leave. Everyone knows that Quebec secession is an old joke, but Newfoundland secession, or Western separation movements—movements that could be going full steam in about a year—are real wild cards to the Central Canadian imagination.

   If Harper can graphically demonstrate that big federal government is what’s wrong with this country—where, over-taxation endows the federal government with a spending power that enables it to meddle in the affairs to the provinces, leaving them delinquent and unaccountable for their OWN social programs and municipalities—he might be able to swoop in as Captain Conservative Canada, ready to hack slash and roll back the federal government.

   I suspect this is part of Harper’s plan. He has a long track record as a fiscal conservative and a strong supporter of provincial rights. He’s already declared Quebec a nation. I suspect that Harper’s long term strategy may be to turn more autonomy for Quebec into more autonomy for all provinces, which would better serve Canadians by giving them more localized and accountable government.

   Clearly, with this last budget, Harper either foreclosed on his Conservative credentials or his long term strategy could be brilliant. Maybe he’s trying to change the culture by making conservatism, at the federal level, a necessity.

   Posted on 28-Mar-07 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

8. canadianna wrote:

   Kathy, these Conservatives chose not to go the route of bold change when they wrote their policy book. They had little chance but the prospect of a minority parliament, and with George Bush and ‘hidden agenda’ rhetoric still simmering, they clearly felt this was their path to governing.

   Had they gone bold, they might have been elected, but I rather doubt it. Even with all the problems with the Liberal Party, a considerable number of Canadians were willing to give the nod to them, or to the other left, left, left of centre parties.

   Do I have proof that Canadians lean left and would balk at a hard right? What a silly question. Of course I don’t have ‘proof’ but I can look around me and know that people born and raised with a cradle to grave social safety net that guarantees things like the child tax benefit, ‘free’ health care, universal old age security and government subsidized higher education, are hardly going to embrace the notion of having to give it all up or pay for these things out of pocket, even if it means a tax cut.

   Is it so wrong to believe that ‘changing the culture’ is not an overnight endeavour? Reagan and Thatcher weren’t followed by strong conservative successes. Their strength and boldness couldn’t be sustained beyond their terms in office.

   The Common Sense Revolution here in Ontario inspired for a while, but it became unsustainable. Change was quick and noticeable, and I would say mostly for the better, but then like all movements, inertia set in. They plateaued and no one knew how to deal with it. After ‘bold’, what’s left? And because some of the consequences of Harris’ time in office were perceived as being mean-spirited, many people were duped into believing his time was a blight on our history — just ask any school kid, their teachers will have told them so.

   What makes me wonder why you’re so impassioned here, is your own quote:

   “Getting elected” means nothing unless we change the culture.

   You mean to change the culture, but you expect it could be done in what? One campaign cycle? You say ‘bold, revolutionary change would inspire, which supports my statement that Canadians are comfortable with our socialist state, but even if they were ‘inspired’ for a moment, that’s hardly a lasting cultural revolution.

   I don’t watch Dr. Phil, but I’d have to say his philosophy doesn’t apply here. Conservatism has hardly been broached on a national level in the past forty years, and when it has been in recent history, it’s been met with ridicule and derision. Being in-yer-face about it is probably not the best reaction to a tentative welcome to power.

   A sustainable change in the culture doesn’t come by shoving conservative ideals down people’s throats. Maybe you’re right, maybe they’d be so shocked and awed that they wouldn’t spew it back — but neither is aggression inspirational and it often invites a visceral and contrary response.

   Posted on 28-Mar-07 at 3:58 pm | Permalink

9. markpeters wrote:

   As I remarked earlier on this site (here) in response to the budget, I think there is latitude to govern conservatively — not just ethically, but conservatively — even in a minority situation.

   Should we expect the government to attempt sweeping changes in a minority situation? No. But at the same time, governing like liberals in a minority situation and then kicking into conservative overdrive in a majority government would immediately create the perception that the electorate had been deceived and would give credence to “hidden agenda” accusations.

   If the party means to govern conservatively, both fiscally and socially, then it must start that work now. The budget was an abysmal failure in that regard, in my opinion, and I am concerned that there are no longer any conservative principles that won’t be compromised en route to majority power.

   Let us be elected as conservatives or not at all.

   Posted on 28-Mar-07 at 6:04 pm | Permalink

10. Catprint in the Mash wrote:

    The Politic

    Posted on 28-Mar-07 at 6:12 pm | Permalink

11. Ryan wrote:

    Folks, its called campaigning from the right and governing from the center. I vastly prefer Harper’s center to the Liberal party’s idea of center.

    Fiscally, this government is conservative. The budget did not have the tax cut goodies that some were looking for, but it did address fiscal balance - something that had to be tackled before an aggressive tax cut programme could be rolled out.

    Socially - Balanced. Choice in childcare was a good step. Social policy thus far seems to focus on enabling choice and helping those to help themselves. Good social policy needs more than a year to be created and rolled out. Fiscal restraint measures in the summer cut a number of liberal social engineering items.

    Posted on 28-Mar-07 at 7:25 pm | Permalink

Post a Comment