When will populism come to Canada?

[Argus]

We've seen populist parties rising around the world in response to a universal belief in how venal, self-serving and out of touch the ruling elites are. I was watching DW (German television) and saw a story on the rise of the Freedom Part in Austria. What struck me was the street interviews with people who supported them, because, they said, they spoke to issues that concerned them, and weren't out of touch like the other parties. That echoes so many others around the world, including a lot of those who voted for Trump down south, and a lot of those who voted for Brexit in the UK. 

So far Canada has not had much in the way of populism, if you ignore Toronto's Rob Ford. But Ford is an indication that, as deeply flawed as the man was, he struck a chord with a lot of people in Toronto. In fact, despite his drug videos he might well have gotten re-elected in the home of Canada's progressives. I think that Canada's elites, an incestuous group of media, political and academics of the left, are every bit as out of touch with the man on the street here as the elites are in other countries, perhaps even more.

I've written of this before, in other topics such as on Trump or on immigration. I think no more blatant an example of this was when John McCallum talked about wanting a drastic increase to immigration, and said everyone he'd spoken to was in favour of it. NO ONE I spoke to was in favour of it. No one. So clearly we're not talking to the same people. I don't think McCalllum talks to real people any more than the talking heads on the CBC or CTV or their preferred academic interviewees. They're immersed in their own world with their own kind and rarely interact with real people. 

I'm not sure who the populist will be or where he or she will come from. The Tories are the most likely place for them unless Trudeau winds up ushering in election by popular vote. Then I expect a rapid rise of one or more populist parties which will ignore the elites' sacred cows and start talking about the things ordinary people talk about, and proposing policy changes which will have the national media and elites aghast.

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ingredients-of-a-populist-rebellion-simmer-in-canada/article25981396/

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2016/12/04/perhaps-its-time-for-a-political-reckoning-watt.html

[Bryan]

If Kevin O'Leary throws his name in for the CPC, you're going to see populism in spades. He'll have many of the same traits that drove both Ford and Trump forward -- an total unwillingness to even pretend to play politics. He'll give us exactly what he is warts and all, and he'll gleefully break with any convention when it comes to criticizing his opponents. Some will be appalled by it, but more than enough will find it to be a refreshing change.

[Vega]

3 minutes ago, Bryan said:

If Kevin O'Leary throws his name in for the CPC, you're going to see populism in spades. He'll have many of the same traits that drove both Ford and Trump forward -- an total unwillingness to even pretend to play politics. He'll give us exactly what he is warts and all, and he'll gleefully break with any convention when it comes to criticizing his opponents. Some will be appalled by it, but more than enough will find it to be a refreshing change.

 

O'Leary isn't a populist and has voiced concerns about Trump. He won't be the one to to carry ascendant Populism to Canada. 

The Reform Party in the 90s could have been a major force but the country just wasn't ready for them yet. There needs to be a strong messenger for a movement to work and be successful. 

Edited December 4, 2016 by Vega

[Derek 2.0]

3 minutes ago, Bryan said:

If Kevin O'Leary throws his name in for the CPC, 

As I said in the leadership thread, O'Leary is the only Tory that could beat Trudeau outright in 2019 (barring some major Trudeau scandal that the media can't ignore). 

[Omni]

I think we should settle for looking south of the border for a leader to shake our heads at and joke abour. Hiring our own game show host would be a big mistake.

[poochy]

i think that good or bad, Canada's identity has become so muddled that I really doubt there is enough nationalism among the population to see them really buy into a Trumpish leader, or even Kellie Lietch, who is trying to tap into similar feelings here.  Overall that's a good thing imo, however that isn't to say that it's all good, and either by accident or design the country has and is being pushed further towards the no nation, no borders socialist ideal, too far imo, but that doesn't mean i would want a populist leader if populist means Trump or Trump like.  Also with the major metropolitan areas controlling who runs the country it's pretty unlikely a populist, who would almost certainly have to be some form of conservative, would do well in all or most of those areas.

[Derek 2.0]

1 minute ago, poochy said:

Also with the major metropolitan areas controlling who runs the country it's pretty unlikely a populist, who would almost certainly have to be some form of conservative, would do well in all or most of those areas.

 

As Argus's article said.......Toronto elected Rob Ford...........anything could happen.

 

With that said, there is no reason as to why the NDP (or even Greens) couldn't select their own populist, along the lines of Bernie Sanders, and find electoral success.......they could simply promise to do all the crap Trudeau promised to do but won't.... "Liberal-Tory same old story"

[Argus]

50 minutes ago, Bryan said:

If Kevin O'Leary throws his name in for the CPC, you're going to see populism in spades. He'll have many of the same traits that drove both Ford and Trump forward -- an total unwillingness to even pretend to play politics. He'll give us exactly what he is warts and all, and he'll gleefully break with any convention when it comes to criticizing his opponents. Some will be appalled by it, but more than enough will find it to be a refreshing change.

I agree with you. His lack of French would be a challenge but you know I don't see a lot of complaints from Quebec about the way Rona Ambrose holds scrums with one of the Quebec MPs at her side to answer questions in French. O'Leary has his flaws too, but not nearly as numerous ones as Trump or Ford.

[poochy]

10 minutes ago, Derek 2.0 said:

 

As Argus's article said.......Toronto elected Rob Ford...........anything could happen.

 

With that said, there is no reason as to why the NDP (or even Greens) couldn't select their own populist, along the lines of Bernie Sanders, and find electoral success.......they could simply promise to do all the crap Trudeau promised to do but won't.... "Liberal-Tory same old story"

I know, but electing a mayor isn't the same as a federal govt, those things are rarely related.  Honestly you're right about that, in fact a leftist populist might be the most likely in this country, i suppose i was thinking about the subject through more of an American lens.  If that happens though what would it be in response to, a really mean conservative government that the 'nice' Canadian leftist thought was evil?  Perhaps in spite of the vote split that's what we have right now, i doubt that trump is going to be able to break any more promises than this government has in its first year, sounds familiar, promise everything to everyone in the middle and the left, deliver on almost none of it.

Edited December 4, 2016 by poochy

[Argus]

55 minutes ago, Vega said:

 

O'Leary isn't a populist and has voiced concerns about Trump. He won't be the one to to carry ascendant Populism to Canada.

O'Leary has some of the same characteristics of a populist, however. He's plain speaking/blunt talking, which is pretty much the opposite of the political/media elites. And his message of 'let's stop spending our money on everything under the damn sun' will resonate with a lot of people, especially middle and lower middle classes, who see their tax dollars going to all sorts of things which aren't helping them.

[Bryan]

9 minutes ago, Argus said:

His lack of French would be a challenge

I think he would use any complaints about that to his advantage. He'd just berate those who brought it up, probably call them bigots.

[eyeball]

I certainly hope we get a right-wing populist government, especially an unrepentant one with a real pagan ethos that's determined to finally stop whining about the left and actually do something about it.

I'm itching for a left/right shooting war myself. Can't come fast enough AFAIC.

Bring it on bozos, you know you wanna.

Edited December 4, 2016 by eyeball

[dialamah]

1 hour ago, Derek 2.0 said:

 

As Argus's article said.......Toronto elected Rob Ford...........anything could happen.

 

With that said, there is no reason as to why the NDP (or even Greens) couldn't select their own populist, along the lines of Bernie Sanders, and find electoral success.......they could simply promise to do all the crap Trudeau promised to do but won't.... "Liberal-Tory same old story"

Yuppers.  Two people in this house are already thinking about voting NDP next time around.    Definitely looking for a rock to throw through the conservative and liberal windows.

 

[eyeball]

It's the same window with those two.

[dre]

I disagree with how populism is being defined here. In my mind the only real populist politician in US history was Henry Ford. Maybe Ron Paul, and Bernie Saunders could be partial qualifiers. Its true that guys like Trump tapped into the fact that people are tired of the political establishment but that is only one part of populism. In the end Trump made a huge amount of promises to various different constituencies like any other politician. But the biggest reason he won is because he ran again one of the worst democratic candidates in history. Not sure I call that populism.

Populist...

Quote

A member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people.

And people here think that fits Kevin Oleary? He openly sneers at ordinary people... Wants to make unions illegal... He represents investors, not anyone else.

[-1=e^ipi]

Pretty sure Trudeau fits in the category of populist. Or are you referring to a specific type of populist?

 

2 hours ago, Bryan said:

If Kevin O'Leary throws his name in for the CPC, you're going to see populism in spades.

O'Leary is not a populist at all. Also, I doubt he will throw his name in for the CPC. Chances are he will endorse Bernier.

 

Edit: Okay, there are many definitions of populism. So the term 'populism' isn't exactly helpful.

For example, if you define populism as one that supports policies that are popular, then Trudeau is populist while O'Leary is not.

But if you were to define populism as one who cares about the concerns of ordinary citizens, then O'Leary is (arguably) while Trudeau is not.

Edited December 4, 2016 by -1=e^ipi

[eyeball]

Trudeau a demagogue? He's about as vanilla a politician as there ever was.

[-1=e^ipi]

20 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Trudeau a demagogue? He's about as vanilla a politician as there ever was.

No, Trudeau is extremely unique as a politician. Name one other major party leader in a western country that won the leadership race on essentially a platform of no policies?

[dre]

13 minutes ago, -1=e^ipi said:

Pretty sure Trudeau fits in the category of populist. Or are you referring to a specific type of populist?

The definition that seems to be applied here would appear to be a sort of neo-populism that has elements of anti-establishment, anti immigration and ethnic/racial purity, and appeal to nationalism.

Unfortunately as with "terrorism", or "fascism", "populism" is one of those vague words where everyone just makes up their own meaning. Which is why ring wingers on here are trying declare their own preferred firebrand mouth pieces as "populists".

[-1=e^ipi]

Like Trudeau will say whatever to get elected and has constantly changed his policies to whatever he thinks is most popular.

 

In 2013, oh changing the national anthem to make it more inclusive, in 2016, oh suddenly I've changed my mind, let's make it more inclusive.

2013-2014, we need to balance the budget, the conservatives; 2015 Uhh... actually deficits are good and we need a 10 billion dollar deficit to fund infrastructure; 2016 actually it's a 30 billion deficit and most of that deficit is not due to infrastructure spending.

2013-2014, the carbon tax was a terrible idea and we will not implement it. 2015, we'll let the provinces cut emissions in the way that we want and we won't force anything on them. 2016, nevermind, we realized that our original policy was dumb, so now we will implement a tax unilaterally if the provinces and territories do not do so.

2015, we will bring in 25000 refugees by the end of 2015. Cause we care so much! 2016, actually that time frame was completely unfeasible and we just made it up to get elected.

2015, 2015 will be the last election with a first past the post system. 2016, actually we may not change the electoral system. We only supported changing it when Harper was in power. We don't want a referendum or proportional representation. Preferably we would like to unilaterally implement STV or alternative voting so we remain in absolute power forever.

 

 

On the other hand, O'Leary supports policies such as having a mixed healthcare system or getting rid of supply management, not because he thinks it is popular, but because he thinks it is right.

[eyeball]

18 minutes ago, -1=e^ipi said:

No, Trudeau is extremely unique as a politician. Name one other major party leader in a western country that won the leadership race on essentially a platform of no policies?

Donald Trump.

[dre]

5 minutes ago, -1=e^ipi said:

On the other hand, O'Leary supports policies such as having a mixed healthcare system or getting rid of supply management, not because he thinks it is popular, but because he thinks it is right.

Not necessarily just because he thinks its right, but also because he thinks its best for him and his friends. Of course industrialists want to privatize as much of healthcare as possible. They look south of the border and the gigantic profits being made and they want to do the same thing up here.

Self interest is the primary motivator for just about everyone. 

 

[Bryan]

9 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Donald Trump.

Trump had a documented policy platform that was on his website right from the time he began the race. The media just chose to ignore it. You can say you don't LIKE his policies, but it's categorically false to say he didn't have any.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

[-1=e^ipi]

13 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Donald Trump.

No he had policies. He wanted to build a wall, he wanted to ban muslims, he wanted to lower corporate taxes, he wanting to cancel the TPP, etc.

The only policy Trudeau had was legalization of marijuana. And he was against legalization of marijuana in 2012 and only changed his mind after deciding to run for leadership. So he basically decided to run for leadership on 0 policies. Just say the world middle class a lot and play identity politics.

[-1=e^ipi]

3 minutes ago, dre said:

Not necessarily just because he thinks its right, but also because he thinks its best for him and his friends. Of course industrialists want to privatize as much of healthcare as possible. They look south of the border and the gigantic profits being made and they want to do the same thing up here.

Self interest is the primary motivator for just about everyone.

 

O'Leary doesn't gain as much profits by pursuing political office.

 

If you look at O'Leary's justification for why he started considering running, a lot of it had to do with talking to engineering students who wanted to go to the states due to lack of economic prospects in Canada. Seems more like altruism as opposed to selfishness that is his motivation. I know this is difficult for you to believe dre, since it can be hard to grasp that some people can genuinely support more libertarian economic policy on altruistic grounds and since it is very convenient for you to be able to dismiss those that argue for such policies as doing it out of selfishness.