AnimalsMagazine

As you’ll remember, if you turn left at centre, you find liberal thinking – those who believe in a strong central government and embrace elements of what’s known as the welfare state, with government subsidizing, say, public health care and the social safety net. And that, in some ways, sums up the Liberal Party of Canada – also known as the Grits.

 

Liberals, you see, are like red foxes. For starters, they both love the colour red. Why? Well, it’s very on brand and stylish to boot!

 

Red foxes are known for being, um, smart like a fox – building alliances where needed to keep their place in the world, even if they’re not always at the top of the food change in a given ecosystem.

 

Liberals, like foxes, are also adaptable when required. Since the turn of the Century, the Liberal Party has won several elections – including this last one – by winning the most seats in the House of Commons, but not the majority of seats in Parliament.

 

To govern without a majority? It requires the minority government to build alliances with other political parties to remain in power.

 

The Liberals do this by embracing a few specific policies championed by one opposition party or another – whoever holds the balance of power in Parliament – in exchange for all-important votes in matters of Parliamentary confidence.

 

So foxy!

 

Historically, the Liberals have been less ideologically liberal and more centrist on the political spectrum. But during the Justin Trudeau era, the Liberals moved definitively leftward to the centre-left position on the spectrum – at times, even, overlapping with the further left NDP.

 

That shift worked until it very much didn’t and now, with Prime Minister Mark Carney as the leader of the party, the Liberals are returning closer to the centre, focusing on economic issues.

 

The ability to shift with political trends might sound like populism, but the Liberals, at least in the eyes of some, are globalists. And while globalism might be in trouble, well, globally, in Canada, it appears to still have life.

 

With a centrist Liberal Party, there is now more room for political parties on the left side of the political spectrum – those who believe even more strongly in role of government to ensure that society as a whole is equal, including redistributing wealth through, say, taxes on corporations and high-income earners.

 

Who occupies this space in Canada?

 

Let’s start with the Greens. They’re kind of like bison.

Bison are all about the environment in which they live. But their numbers aren’t exactly strong and their hold on existence is a bit touch-and-go. That said, where they exist, they tend to be loved.

 

Similarly, the Greens wish they could be impacting races all across the country, but that’s a pipe dream. Small in numbers, Greens, like bison, must be hyper-focused on specific ridings where the environment is top of mind.

 

And though they think they punch above their weight in Parliament and draw supporters from across the political spectrum, more often than not, they’re a protest vote, firmly planted on the left side of the political spectrum.

 

But the very existence of the Greens, at times, eats into the NDP vote.

 

The NDP has always been a left-wing party and was a party of the rural, working class – it was started as a farmer-labour party by Tommy Douglas in Saskatchewan. Today, though, the NDP is trying to be both an urban social justice-environmentalist party and the party of worker rights.

 

Which sounds a lot like the badger.

Prairie origins. Scrappy. Defends its territory fiercely from, um, foxes. But as the country has changed, badgers have had to leave their traditional roots, finding new purpose on the landscape – which is never easy and, at times, has led to problems.

 

The federal NDP is no different, struggling to maintain relevance in a changing political climate. That’s in part because environmental and social justice issues don’t always play nicely in the sandbox with labour issues.

 

While provincial NDP parties in different provinces have a clear identity and a winning track record, it’s possible that federally, in trying to be too many things to too many people, the party has lost its core following.

 

The same can’t be said, however, of the Conservative Party of Canada.

 

Today’s Conservatives – also known as Tories – in many ways, are like blue jays. (Not the baseball Blue Jays!) Why? Well, like the bird, Conservatives are traditionalists who embrace the rights of the individual and believe in living within their means. And just as blue jays can adapt to different habitats without becoming reliant on handouts, Conservatives believe free enterprise, not government handouts, is what can help address problems in society.

 

While all of this firmly places the Conservatives on the right side of the political spectrum, they are increasing embracing policies that appeal to union workers – the traditional voting base of the NDP.

 

It’s a strategic move because in many rural parts of the country, races are between the Conservatives and the NDP, not Liberals and the Conservatives.

 

And though it might seem odd that voters can swing between two parties perceived to be at wildly different ends of the political spectrum, the reality is these voters have a common cause in being anti-establishment.

 

And anti-establishment? That’s the definition of populism!

 

Populists, as you’ll remember, are anti-globalists and most certainly anti-elites. Political populists, if we’re being honest, are often defined as being opportunists. Which sounds bad until you realize, like blue jays and their opportunistic feeding practices, is really just about responding to survival fears.

 

In many ways, the Conservatives are trying to be the party of the individual – whether that’s a wealthy tech innovator or a blue-collar worker – promising to remove any gate keepers – the establishment – who might be impacting their ability to succeed.

 

And though that strategy didn’t work quite as well as the Conservatives hoped in the last election, it doesn’t mean it won’t work in the next one.

 

Don’t forget: given that we have a minority government at the moment, the next election could happen much sooner than the mandated 2029 election date. After all, minority governments can only govern with the confidence of the House. If enough opposition members defeat the government, or the government believes the conditions are ripe to convert their minority into a majority, an early election is always possible.

 

Anyway, now you’re up to speed on Canadian political ideology, right? Wrong!

 

In addition to the left-right, globalist-populist ideological debate, there is one other ideology, and its corresponding political movements, that shapes our political discourse: nationalism.

 

This ideology is defined by a love and desire to protect a culture from outside influence, and it isn’t new to Canada.

 

Nationalism has been alive and well in Quebec, in many ways, since before confederation. And since the 1990s, the Bloc Québécois has acted as Quebec’s nationalist party, with a Quebec first and, in many ways, Quebec independence focus. The French/English divide, exemplified by the Bloc, has defined so many of Canada unity debates.

 

Will it continue to define our debates? Good question.

 

The Bloc’s power has been diminished in the House of Commons – but it certainly hasn’t been extinguished – and the Parti Quebecois, their provincial cousin, is very popular in Quebec. Yet in the wake of US President Donald Trump’s threats to Canada’s sovereignty, support for Quebec independence has declined. For good? Only time will tell.

 

But Quebec isn’t the only front in Canada’s national unity debates. Regional nationalism also exists in the west.

 

Many voters in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and parts of northeastern BC embrace nationalistic values. Like Quebec, these regions believe strongly in protecting provincial rights and jurisdiction because they fear Ottawa will override, or even destroy, their distinct local culture and values.

 

Now Quebec’s culture is obviously distinct, with the province having been recognized as a nation within a nation, or so the House of Commons declared when Stephen Harper was in power.

 

Is Alberta and the prairie nationalist west deserving of the same recognition? Some argue yes. And those voices are getting louder.

 

Alberta and Quebec – often seen to be political opposites and mortal enemies – actually share a similar belief in cultural and economic protectionism, even if how they interpret that philosophy is different at times.

 

While Quebec largely embraces nationalism with a healthy dose of progressive politics – with some very significant exceptions – it’s a different story in the prairie west.

 

Here, nationalistic tendencies have led voters to embracing parties – and leaders of parties – who are more conservative than the traditional, federal Conservative options. Think the once-upon-a-time Social Credit, Reform and Canadian Alliance parties – all of which were more populist and nationalistic than the former Progressive Conservative Party.

 

But since the Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservatives merged under Stephen Harper to unite the right, more strident nationalistic tendencies (think those who support the Prairie West becoming America’s 51st state) are why some voters, at least at times, have flirted with the harder right-wing People’s Party of Canada, a party that has more support in the Prairies than anywhere else.

 

While the PPC might be a spent force, for now, prairie nationalism most certainly has gained a political foothold, with its most outspoken champion being Alberta’s current premier, Danielle Smith.

 

The premier, who has constantly been at odds with Ottawa, has been advocating for a new relationship between the province and the country, threatening a national unity crisis if her demands aren’t met.

 

Western alienation, of course, isn’t new, but a separation movement is different twist on the old dynamic.

 

Will a federal separation party materialize in the prairie west, similar to that of the Bloc Québécois? Or, in the face of bigger issues, will the fledgling separation movement fizzle out?

 

 

One thing is for certain: in a changing world, political ideology is evolving and so too are party positions. Learning how different Canadians in different corners of the country organize their political beliefs is critical to understanding the important debates of our time – debates that very well may decide the future of our nation.