One of the oldest brands in Canadian politics is facing its most modern crisis: grievance politics has become its pulse, and governance a departing spirit.
Very astute analysis. I'm hoping that in the end Canadians reject grievance politics as the resulting landscape could look a lot like the current state of affairs in the US.
Back when the Federal Election was held there was a part of me that wanted the Conservatives to win, not because I supported them or Poilievre but because I thought it would’ve served as the best way to rip the bandaid off this grievance politics BS and expose how fake it all is to the entire country
But inn retrospect (especially what happened after my last Family Thanksgiving) I’m not sure it would’ve mattered in the sense of moving any sort of political needle for the Conservative Party
At least in terms of convincing the very specific group of voters that needed to be convinced that what was being sold to them was not real
Very possible; look at liberals holding steady as Carney is forced to back down against trump. The real difference is that Carney is focused on building for success and Poilievre would have tried to cut his way down there. Carney sets us up for future success in a way Poilievre couldn’t imagine, let alone manage.
The whole feeding the anger machine thing is a losing battle. It also isn’t a lofty goal at all— it’s “form government based on my singular personal grievance that I’m reliably informed via FB likes is super popular” 🙄
This was a very good overview of the world currently. There is great change underway and that is breeding fear and discontent while encouraging citizens to gather around a 'grievance' rather than adjustments to this changing world. History is a great teacher but it's necessary to apply learning to adapt and flourish. Look forward not in the rear-view mirror.
What an excellent post. Thank you. My concern is that while you argued well why grevience conservatives will get opposition but not government.At some point they will get government cuz of how thin the pickings are on the ground ( and I'd dare say how short attention spans and becoming and reactive public discourse has been made) And at that point the governance of government is also lost.
That is a very scary thought ( look south) Building robust safeguards now would be prudent. I'm not seeing it.
And you’re absolutely correct; they might form government— Pierre almost did!
I’m not a great partisan in the purest sense; I don’t like political parties because I don’t like their influence or structure, but I don’t really have anything for or against party principles. I’ve yet to see that anyone has cornered the market on “faith, family, and fiscal responsibility” (aside from branding).
My ideal scenario is that the leaders and potential candidates are all so good that I’m not sure who to vote for— but also not scared of wins.
With governance v grievance politics, I find that I don’t dislike governance-focused leaders from any party. Grievance-focused is an entirely different story— from any of them.
Grievance politics is a nonsensical concept. Maybe the conservative are the wise ones and the liberals and NDP are the grievers. The conservatives have a bad habit of choosing the minority side to champion- a habit that guarantees electoral difficulties. Interest politics would be a more accurate way of describing Canadian political realities. Try urban voters of Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver vs the rural populations of the BC interior, the Prairies and Western Ontario. The rural voters are badly out numbered by the urbanites and the continued frustration with bad policies has helped lead the rise of western separatism. Beware, this dissatisfaction will grow to include other regions in the West. Another thing to be concerned about is that the separatist movements the Canadian west is being noticed in other countries. The USA?
Grievance politics is not partisan. Harper knew Reform/Alliance wouldn’t be able to take him to the PMO, which is probably why decided not to run again in 1997 even in his safe seat with Reform. Grievance politics are for opposition parties, not governing parties.
So you make my point. They all do it but the caveat you put on-it they must be in opposition.
I have serious issues with left leaning governments. That is, I have grievances with them. Opposition parties who do not express those grievances do not speak for me. By addressing those grievances, they will hopefully come up with a governing package that will improve upon the monstrous failings of the liberals.
After some time in the opposition side, liberal grievances expressed well might win them an election. Their grievance politics will become government policy. Isn’t democracy grand?
Except that a reliance on solely grievance politics doesn’t tend to get parties elected. Reform. Canadian Alliance. People’s Party. Back to Harper whose foundation and manipulation techniques relied on grievance, but he had to prove he was serious about governing (2 minorities to convince Canadians to give him a majority). Same with the NDP in 2015– they removed things from their platform that were red meat for their base but not a sign of a serious governing party.
So from the provincial perspective can Guthrie fill the bill?
As much as I had hoped Nenshi could gain traction, "that dog don't seem able to hunt!".
Calgary-Shaw will like the most expensive byelection in Alberta history. Too bad Schulz didn't beat out Smith but the seppie faction took over the UCP and we're stuck with Kenney's biggest error.
Very astute analysis. I'm hoping that in the end Canadians reject grievance politics as the resulting landscape could look a lot like the current state of affairs in the US.
Same… 🙏
Back when the Federal Election was held there was a part of me that wanted the Conservatives to win, not because I supported them or Poilievre but because I thought it would’ve served as the best way to rip the bandaid off this grievance politics BS and expose how fake it all is to the entire country
But inn retrospect (especially what happened after my last Family Thanksgiving) I’m not sure it would’ve mattered in the sense of moving any sort of political needle for the Conservative Party
At least in terms of convincing the very specific group of voters that needed to be convinced that what was being sold to them was not real
Very possible; look at liberals holding steady as Carney is forced to back down against trump. The real difference is that Carney is focused on building for success and Poilievre would have tried to cut his way down there. Carney sets us up for future success in a way Poilievre couldn’t imagine, let alone manage.
Great essay Deirdre!
Thank you for this - grievance politics as the amyl nitrate popper for modern devolving RW politics!
Oy vey!
It’s not unlike stomach acid eating them from the inside out.
They’re so consumed with being aggrieved they don’t have a purpose.
Solve all their grievances then what? What’s the next antithesis?
The whole feeding the anger machine thing is a losing battle. It also isn’t a lofty goal at all— it’s “form government based on my singular personal grievance that I’m reliably informed via FB likes is super popular” 🙄
This was a very good overview of the world currently. There is great change underway and that is breeding fear and discontent while encouraging citizens to gather around a 'grievance' rather than adjustments to this changing world. History is a great teacher but it's necessary to apply learning to adapt and flourish. Look forward not in the rear-view mirror.
Thanks Kathleen; much appreciated :)
Harper is no moderate.
FORD
SMITH
FINDLAY
JIVANI
and PP
Are ALL TRAITORS. ⛓️💥🇨🇦
What an excellent post. Thank you. My concern is that while you argued well why grevience conservatives will get opposition but not government.At some point they will get government cuz of how thin the pickings are on the ground ( and I'd dare say how short attention spans and becoming and reactive public discourse has been made) And at that point the governance of government is also lost.
That is a very scary thought ( look south) Building robust safeguards now would be prudent. I'm not seeing it.
Thank you :)
And you’re absolutely correct; they might form government— Pierre almost did!
I’m not a great partisan in the purest sense; I don’t like political parties because I don’t like their influence or structure, but I don’t really have anything for or against party principles. I’ve yet to see that anyone has cornered the market on “faith, family, and fiscal responsibility” (aside from branding).
My ideal scenario is that the leaders and potential candidates are all so good that I’m not sure who to vote for— but also not scared of wins.
With governance v grievance politics, I find that I don’t dislike governance-focused leaders from any party. Grievance-focused is an entirely different story— from any of them.
Again much appreciated the distinction you made how you presented them
That brand died when MacKay sold it out to the reformers.
That was the PC brand— not the conservative one.
wtf is difference?
Grievance politics is a nonsensical concept. Maybe the conservative are the wise ones and the liberals and NDP are the grievers. The conservatives have a bad habit of choosing the minority side to champion- a habit that guarantees electoral difficulties. Interest politics would be a more accurate way of describing Canadian political realities. Try urban voters of Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver vs the rural populations of the BC interior, the Prairies and Western Ontario. The rural voters are badly out numbered by the urbanites and the continued frustration with bad policies has helped lead the rise of western separatism. Beware, this dissatisfaction will grow to include other regions in the West. Another thing to be concerned about is that the separatist movements the Canadian west is being noticed in other countries. The USA?
Grievance politics is not partisan. Harper knew Reform/Alliance wouldn’t be able to take him to the PMO, which is probably why decided not to run again in 1997 even in his safe seat with Reform. Grievance politics are for opposition parties, not governing parties.
So you make my point. They all do it but the caveat you put on-it they must be in opposition.
I have serious issues with left leaning governments. That is, I have grievances with them. Opposition parties who do not express those grievances do not speak for me. By addressing those grievances, they will hopefully come up with a governing package that will improve upon the monstrous failings of the liberals.
After some time in the opposition side, liberal grievances expressed well might win them an election. Their grievance politics will become government policy. Isn’t democracy grand?
Except that a reliance on solely grievance politics doesn’t tend to get parties elected. Reform. Canadian Alliance. People’s Party. Back to Harper whose foundation and manipulation techniques relied on grievance, but he had to prove he was serious about governing (2 minorities to convince Canadians to give him a majority). Same with the NDP in 2015– they removed things from their platform that were red meat for their base but not a sign of a serious governing party.
So from the provincial perspective can Guthrie fill the bill?
As much as I had hoped Nenshi could gain traction, "that dog don't seem able to hunt!".
Calgary-Shaw will like the most expensive byelection in Alberta history. Too bad Schulz didn't beat out Smith but the seppie faction took over the UCP and we're stuck with Kenney's biggest error.
Please administer the Last Sacrament and forget the legacy of sacralage.