Political culture of Canada
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Canadian political culture is in some ways part of a greater North American and European political culture, which emphasizes constitutional law, freedom of religion, personal liberty, and regional autonomy; these ideas stemming in various degrees from the British common law and French civil law traditions, North American aboriginal government, and English civic traditions, among others.
Peace, order, and good government are the stated goals of the Canadian government. These words reveal much about the history of Canadian political culture. There is a strong tradition of loyalty, compromise and tolerance in Canadian political culture. In general, Canadian politics have not operated through revolutionary, swift changes. Instead, change is typically slow and worked out through compromise between interest groups, regional consultations, and the government of the day.
Canada also has a recent tradition of liberalism. Individual rights have risen to the forefront of political and legal importance for most Canadians, as demonstrated through support for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a relatively free economy, and liberal attitudes toward homosexuality, women's rights, and egalitarian movements. However, there is also a sense of collective responsibility in Canadian political culture, as is demonstrated in general support for universal health care, gun control, foreign aid, and other social democrat social programs.
Contents |
[edit] Political cleavages
When analyzing Canadian political parties and leaders, it is important to note that since federal-provincial, French-English, and Canada-US relations are so important, a simple Left-Right spectrum based on only one criterion can be misleading. Also of increasing importance in recent polls is concern for the environment. In the main, only the parties that have currently elected MPs can be discussed in detail, although the increasing strength of the Green Party of Canada bears mentioning.
In terms of economic policy, the Conservative (or Tory Party), is the least interventionist of the major parties, the Liberals slightly more so, and the New Democrats substantially more interventionist. Historically this was not always the case. In the 19th Century, the Liberal Party stood for British classical liberalism and free trade, and the Conservatives, especially so-called "Red Tories", for protectionism. During the 20th Century however, the Liberal Party adopted more elements of European reform liberalism, and co-opted elements of the social-democratic Progressive Party of Canada, and Co-operative Commonwealth Federation. During the 1990s the Liberals shifted back to a more neoliberal position on the economy and trade, but as the other parties moved as well, this did not result in a change in position on the spectrum. Within the Reform Party of Canada there was an element of anti-market populism but this faded as the Reform Party became more associated with US-style neoconservatism. The NDP have retained many of the socialist tendencies of the former CCF and remain to the left of some other social democratic parties in the Western world, such as Britain’s Labour Party. The Bloc Quebecois do not place a strong emphasis on economic policy, as the party’s sole raison d’etre has to do with issues of Quebec’s place in Canada, however they are broadly social democratic.
In term of the pace of change, the Tories are conservative, the Liberals and NDP tend towards the more progressive, and the BQ are radical, favouring Quebec’s withdrawal from the Canadian state and society.
In regards to federal-provincial relations it can said that BQ are separatist, the Tories decentralist, the Liberals status-quo, and the NDP centralist. Note that the NDP and BQ are allies on economic matters but completely opposite in terms of issues of federalism. Historically the Liberals were the party of provincial rights, and the Tories of centralism, but that switched during the 20th Century.
With regards to issues of diversity (bilingualism and multiculturalism), the Tories tend to be more majoritarian, favouring a reduced scope for official bilingualism and a more assimilationist approach to immigrants and Native peoples. The Liberals and NDP more pluralistic including generous government support for minority cultures, while the BQ favour viewing Canada as two separate societies (English Canada and Quebec), and advocate strong protections for French language and culture in Quebec while remaining unconcerned about issues with other minorities or in other parts of the country.
As pertains to relations with the United States, currently the Conservative Party advocates close relations, the NDP is more skeptical of American power, and the Liberals in between. The BQ hopes to create an independent Quebec state that will set its own policy on foreign relations, separate from those of Canada. The current Tory and Liberal positions are the exact reverse of the late and 19th and early 20th Centuries when the Tories were the party of anti-Americanism.
The historical position of the parties on those issues is closely related to two other historical cleavages in Canada, religion and empire. During the 19th and early 20th Centuries English Canada remained strongly committed to the British Empire and Protestantism. French Canada was more anti-Imperialist and strongly Catholic. Attempting to form stable parties that could win seats in both areas was a daunting task, and led to political deadlock in the Province of Canada before Confederation.
During the era of Confederation, British-style Whig liberals from Canada West, the Clear Grits and Reformers, attempted to work with the anti-clerical minority in Canada East, the Parti rouge, and liberals in the Maritimes to form the Liberal Party. While the avowedly anti-democratic Tories of the English colonies attempted to create a coalition with conservative Catholics in Canada East, the Parti bleu.
Keeping these diverse coalitions united remained difficult when interests cut across party lines, and instead inflamed sectional feeling. The first such issues were the two Riel Rebellions of 1870 and 1885 which hardened Catholic – Protestant animosity. The Tory government of Sir John A. Macdonald, himself an Orangeman, eventually oversaw the execution of Metis leader Louis Riel, a devout Catholic. The Tory party as decimated in Quebec, and the Liberal party everywhere else. Eventually, Sir Wilfred Laurier was able to lead the Liberals back to a competitive position in English Canada, but by the time of the First World War, and the Conscription Crisis of 1917, Laurier again found himself in charge of a Liberal Party limited to Quebec and a few other pockets. In part because of the memories of these eras, the Tory party gained a reputation as being anti-Catholic and anti-French, and remained substantially weaker that the Liberals in Quebec from the 1890s to the 1980s, with the lone exception of 1958. Meanwhile, Laurier’s Liberals were accused of not supporting the Mother Country forcefully enough during the Boer War and with the creation of the Canadian Navy, widely disparaged as a Tin Pot Navy , which hurt his party in Anglo-Saxon Ontario.
Since that time, sectarianism as faded substantially as an issue in Canada, and relations with Britain are no longer of nearly the same importance. Instead the debate over the future of Quebec and relations with the United States have become powerful issues.
[edit] Relationship with the United States
Canada and the United States are both nations with their own unique heritages and cultures stemming back for centuries, but the two countries also share many similarities which have generally strengthened relations. Canada's relationship with the U.S. has usually been a dominant focus of Canada's foreign affairs. Various Prime Ministers such as Sir John A. Macdonald, Sir Robert Borden, John Diefenbaker, and Pierre Trudeau have attempted to reasonably distance Canada from the United States to focus on self-sufficiency while maintaining good relations, while other Prime Ministers such as Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Louis St. Laurent, and Brian Mulroney attempted to integrate with the Americans on an economic level and strived for close political relations hoping to enlarge markets. Both courses have had their benefits and downfalls and the Canadian people have usually been cautious of too much integration with the United States, and on the other hand equally as cautious of creating poor relations.
The goal for most successful governments has been to try to preserve Canadian independence and some level of self-sufficiency, while working on maintaining friendly relations and mutually beneficial trade.
Trade has generally stood as being one of the most controversial and difficult of all of the issues between Canada and the United States. There have been three major trading policies aimed at the United States which have been implemented by Canadian governments. The National Policy of Canada's first Prime Minister, Sir John A. Macdonald placed high tariffs on US goods and was very successful in building Canada's manufacturing industry. The National Policy remained in effect to one degree or another for over a century, and saw Canada transformed from a poor colony prior to 1867 into one of the world's wealthiest nations by the 20th century. The National Policy enjoyed strong support among Canadian nationalists who wanted to ensure that Canada would never become "subservient" to the United States, and originally it was supported by big businesses who feared US competition. However much later big business would begin seeking larger markets and would become opposed to economic nationalism and would come out supporting free trade, leaving support for economic protectionism mainly made up of small businesses, trade unions and nationalists.
The National Policy was followed by a policy of "freer trade" which was slowly implemented by Liberal Party Prime Ministers, William Lyon Mackenzie King, Louis St. Laurent and Lester Pearson. "Freer trade" was not free trade in any way, shape or form. Instead it meant the reduction of taxation on US goods. In 1988 Progressive Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney broke with his party's economic nationalist tradition and negotiated the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the United States, which led to North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994. This new agreement allowed the US complete access to the Canadian market while at the same time retaining the right to block Canadian access to the US markets at any time. There were benefits, but also problems. Many Canadian manufacturers claimed that it was difficult to compete with larger US companies which were able to charge less for their products.
Also many Canadians were and still are worried about the threats which certain sections of NAFTA are believed to pose to Canada's environment and cultural institutions. A short example would be the provisions which make it impossible to stop selling a product once a nation has begun selling it, if the Canadian government gives into demands by US companies to sell water from the Great Lakes or lumber from protected crown lands, then the government according to the agreement will not be able to stop those companies from purchasing as much water from the Great Lakes (or other lakes and rivers) or trees from protected lands as they please.
There are many pros and cons to the agreement, and the debate over it highlights some of the insecurities and fears surrounding Canada-U.S. relations. On the other hand supporters claim that the agreement has created hundreds of thousands of jobs in Canada, while opponents point to a weaker Canadian dollar and a stronger U.S. dollar being behind job creation. Regardless of whether it is beneficial or harmful Canada can back out of the North American Free Trade Agreement at any time it wishes to do so with 6 months' notice.
Trade with the US is not the only issue which has created controversy. Differing opinions on US wars such as the Vietnam war or the war in Iraq, as well as US opposition to past wars in which Canada has been involved such as World War I and World War II, both of which the U.S. originally opposed itself have also created difficulties. As well, the issue of Ballistic Missile Defence, a controversial American system which most Canadians do not want to see Canada involved with.
[edit] References
- Stewart, Gordon T. The Origins of Canadian Politics : a Comparative Approach. Vancouver : University of British Columbia Press, 1986. ISBN 0-7748-0260-X.
