Fundamentally, conservatism is a cultural perspective. It’s a philosophical outlook rooted in ones traditions and heritage. Managerialism is the obliteration of culture and tradition, in favor of sterile technocratic governance. Once the Official Right surrendered to this it ceased to be conservative. No conservative ends can ever be achieved at gun point. Political liberty, after all, is the minimization of the use of coercion by the state in its essential role of preventing one person’s freedom from intruding upon another’s.
That’s why Buckley Conservatism is dying. The challenges of this age are all cultural. Globalism marshals the monopoly of force of each state against the local communities trying to hold onto their traditional way of life. Mass migration disrupts the demographic balance that makes for social stability. You can’t address these forces, much less oppose them, with programs that promise to expand the role of the state in the affairs of the citizens.
The Contract with America promised to eliminate 95 specific government programs. None of those programs were eliminated. Welfare reform was passed and offered the first substantive alterations of these programs in a generation. Even so, the budget for these 95 programs during Gingrich’s time as Speaker grew by 13%. That’s the story of post-Cold War conservatism. Lots of Five Year Plans and artfully labeled agendas, but the result has been a 25 year run of expanding government and retreating liberty.
h/t Me No Dhimmi
The British have told their managerial staff to get stuffed with the Brexit win.
Many many so-called “conservative” politicians share the blame with Newt, and I’m not sure that he’s even the worst of the bunch.
This also perfectly describes the Harper Torys, which is why huge swaths of their “agenda” (such as it was) have been rolled back by the Liberals in less than a year. The inertia of the leviathan bureaucracy is strong – you can’t turn it around by giving tax credits for kids playing soccer…
The NDP get in power in Alberta and in 6 months they go about trying to completely transform an entire economy and don’t give a flying *&$^ who is affected, while the Torys, in, what 8 years, managed to scrap an outdated wheat board and a failed registry system, all the while measuring every other decision based on securing votes from certain particular demographics.
So, yeah, these “conservative” parties might win elections but we all lose anyway.
Who killed it? Easy, softball question.
Cuckservatives who were afraid of being called racist and gave NA jobs to immigrants;
Cuckservatives who platformed on freedoms and gave them away;
Cuckservatives whi had majorities or 3 branches and didn’t do a damn thing conservative.
Conservatism has always been a bill of goods. It only slows down the long march leftwards. I, and many others, want the man who stands up for beliefs and says not only “no more” but “that which you gained we’re repealing”.
Rather like a nationalist Trudeau but less gay and actually loves The West.
In the political policy realm, I like to use a two dimensional graphic with one axis representing economic liberty and the other, civil liberty. At the low extreme for both criteria we find socialists, fascists and communists positioned slightly differently, while at the other, libertarians. Between those (and sometimes touching those, there are unique amorphous blobs (representing political party policies) protruding in all directions depending on specific policies. Conservatives, Liberals, and the NDP (and their US proxies) each have unique shapes but all three seriously overlap due to the pandering effect of elections (they all rely on LIVs or “centrists”). In terms of morality, the “good” is only found in the extent to which the blobs approach the libertarian theoretical point on the matrix.
Conservatives don’t understand there aren’t enough of them to get elected, they must fuse with classical liberals to uphold the values of free enterprise and limited government.
Their chauvinism kills that off; it’s a wonder Harper lasted as long as he did. While I value many Conservative tenets, in end they help guarantee progressivism remains the dominant governing ideology.
I don’t like that one bit, or their obsession with principle over power. Our soldiers in Yugoslavia used an expression to describe threatening action against drunken “soldiers” who didn’t want to cooperate – dead right.
Conservatives, ideologically speaking, are dead right imho. We have progressive Trudeau bookends, pulling at the treasury and our freedom at our past and future, partly because many so-called Conservatives turned against Harper, many in a very public and personal way.
Nice open by Kate and great summation by slaw.
old lori; one of the most respected contributors on here IMHO called me out for stepping back and in essence yielding the field to progressives. I have been a conservative my entire life and have worked for years within the PC-Reform-CPC.
The ugly truth that I have finally realized is that a significant number of conservatives are there for what they can personally get out of it. I am sure other parties are no different.
This jaded opinion came to a head when the fundamental principals of Reform were sacrificed by the CPC for eastern votes. In that process our riding association was destroyed along with others. Top down was re-established. Yes there are forces in our society, independent of the party, who actively worked to see that happen.
Canada has fundamental weaknesses that work against long term greatness. It is only the richness of this country that has allowed the progress to date. World debt, including Canada’s, will eventually cause a collapse. At that point fiscal realism will force the issues facing this country to be dealt with in a realistic manner. Failure to do so will lead to a breakup of Canada.
Is managerialism then the reason why the CBC’s programming is so bad?
CBC’s programming is abysmal simply because its annual subsidy is abysmally insufficient. The Liberals will undoubtedly increase this subsidy to $2 billion per annum however, much to the dismay of the Friends of the CBC, the increase will be incremental. It might take a year or two. After all, the CBC is an icon and an integral part of our social fabric, don’t ya know.
All kidding aside …. the annual subsidy to the CBC is, without a doubt, the largest waste of tax dollars anywhere on the planet and is indeed a sickening tribute to the stupidity and/or cowardice of our politicians.
“It’s why the modern conservative endlessly prattles on about his principles. For them, dignified submission is a principle. ”
The downfall of Conservatism has more to do with the sea change in society. Former generations believed in duty,honor,Country and were restrained by God’s Laws. We have moved far away from that,most of our educators are and have been atheists for two generations, and our politicians and businessmen come from the same ranks.
It’s all about,”what will it get ME”, these days,and the old bumper sticker,”whoever dies with the most toys,wins” is more than just a joke.
I am still firmly planted in the Eisenhower era of conservativism, but recognize that no one under sixty is,and our numbers are dwindling quite naturally as we shuffle off to wherever and whatever.
WE lost the last election because we failed to recognize the change,just like the Bookies in Britain failed to anticipate the Brexit.
Today, we are divided politically into camps with different names, but run by the same type of people with the same agenda.
And I agree with “slaw’, Harper pissed off a lot of us by his timidity in his last two years, and his mismanagement of people in his sphere caused the glorious return of the Natural Governing Party, probably for along time to come.
I posted this on the Brexit link but thought I’d post here again as it might be more relevant.
“Just a late thought to the regular readers here. In celebration of this victory we have lost sight of the fact that later generations may attribute this radical change of power to a man from the West called Harper. For ten years he tried to slowly bring about change to the status quo, but as one man against a stacked deck of the bureaucracy and the MSM his chances were slim. Last year as the Brexit campaign was just beginning I believe Nigel Farage had a meeting with Stephen Harper and I wonder how much impact that meeting may have had on last nights outcome. A great deal has been said about the ‘back room boys’ in all political parties, neither Harper nor Farage played that game and now Trump is following suite. I believe Canadians lost a great deal when Trudeau was elected but I’m finding a bit of solace in the Brexit outcome. Perhaps saner heads in the West will come to the realization that the system has been corrupted since the middle of the last century but now we can see that we, the governed, will decide our own future and not be dictated to by the ‘boys in the back room’.”
Who killed conservative philosophy? No simple answer here but I think Don Morris hit on a few good points.
The Conservatives like Locke, Smith, Burke etc believed in things like natural law, moral order,individualism and reason. These ideals are not valued as much today. Group thought, collective rights, the lack of moral authority rule.
The church has lost it’s way and influence.
I’m not quite as tough on Harper as some on this site are. No Conservative promoting the ideas of the above mentioned would stand a snowballs chance in hell of forming government in Canada. Harper was about as conservative as you can be and still win. Politics is, after all the art of the possible.
Conservative philosophy is not a dominant thought force in the era of flexible morality and the me generation.
I dont necessarily disagree with the Harper critics here, but many seem to forget that right from the very start – his running for the leadership of the Canadian Alliance – he was counted out and discredited by the media. But he won.
Then he set about to unite the right – which the same media critics said could not be done. But he won.
Then he had to fight off challenges from the progressive side of the party (stronach who the media loved loved loved). But he won.
Then Harper had to fight a snap election called by Martin with the ink barely dry on the unified CPC party – and held the predicted Martin super majority to a minority. Thats a win in my books
Then he defeated the liberals and formed a minority. He won again
Then he fought off an attempted sedition coalition and formed another minority. He won again
And then after the next election formed a majority. He won again
To this point Harper was fighting a hostile media, hostility from the progressives in his party, the regular political opposition, and governing the country in an admirable fashion.
He won every fight that he was supposed to lose.
Throughout all this he had his critics on the conservative side as well that said he was doing it all wrong.
And after steering the country throught the global financial crisis, and elevating Canadas middle class to #1 in the world, and delivering a balanced budget – the Conservatives were positioned to win again and frankly should have.
Harpers problem was that the average Canadian still believes what comes out of their television sets as unbiased objective news.
It took everything the left had from cult of personality politics, to a media registering with elections Canada to campaign against Harper, to non stop relentless coverage of a nothing burger called Duffy,and unions flipping their vote to the Libs at the last minute to push the Libs over the line. (and the left has Google, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft assisting with their tech wizardry)
The wonder is not that Stephen Harper lost the last election, its that he ever won anything at all, the way the deck was continually stacked against him.
Critics here seem to be arguing from the position that the playing field Harper was on was level and the officials (media) were nuetral, and that it was somehow his personality or managment skills that contributed to his downfall.
Harper was not in the back pocket of the Laurentian/progressive elites. Thats why he had to go. No other reason.
Sadly we will never see another leader with his courage, tactical abilities, leadership qualities, and integrity. Is simply won’t be allowed to happen.
If you want to change the culture, change the people. Through control of education and immigration, that is exactly left has done. It’s over. There is no going back. It’s best to go Galt until the whole rotten thing collapses, because there is no fixing it.
Who killed conservatism? Karl Marx in our educational facilities for forty years. Minuteman, exactly.
That said, Ward, Don, and others make excellent points. All have merit. Until the people begin to realize they have been had by a false utopia and like Minuteman said, “…there is no fixing it”.
The Nolan Chart expresses the political spectrum better.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart
I’m not willing to give Marx credit for killing conservatism. He wanted to eradicate capitalism – he has not been successful.
Conservative philosophy is still alive. It is not in the majority for certain but it has not gone away.
Socialism holds sway these days largely on the back of capitalism that produces the wealth so desired by the socialists.
William F. Cuckley killed it.
the gorgons are strong in Canada.