How I became a Red Tory

It was nice to see Jack Layton and his NDP putting tough questions to the Harper Tories in the debate on Afghanistan. It was the first time in a long time that the NDP leader addressed the Harper Tories, and not the Liberals, as the real enemy of socialism.

Layton's relationship with the Tories is unique in the history of Canadian socialism. It is certainly not the brand espoused by its pioneers, Tommy Douglas and David Lewis, who knew that their real enemy was the reactionary Toryism espoused over the years by Arthur Meighen, George Drew and now their ideological descendants, Stephen Harper and his National Citizens Coalition.

These free-enterprise stalwarts considered Lewis and Douglas Communists, and loved Red-baiting U.S. Senator Joe McCarthy. Harper's hero, William F. Buckley, wrote a book defending "the junior senator from Wisconsin," as he was famously called by U.S. television news pioneer Edward R. Murrow.

On Lewis's behalf, let me say to Mr. Layton: Watch out for Harper and the National Citizens Coalition. Climbing into bed with the Harper Tories could lead to fleas for Layton and Canadian socialism.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/viewpoint/vp_zolf/20060419.html

and the rest of what passes for Canada's Geritol political elite is busy rehabilitating the old Conservative Party.

Zolf has really hit the skids--must be drinking again:



I watched with horror as the New Left Waffle wing of the NDP turned on Lewis and organized labour in 1971, branding him unfit to lead the party he had founded and labour as too American.

After watching this arrogance at work, I stayed pro-labour and pro-Lewis but I stopped being a New Democrat

I turned instead to the Red Tories. My love and admiration of John Diefenbaker began the process, but it was my worship of Camp that made me the reddest of Red Tories.

As a Red Tory all I see of that wing in the new Conservative party are Senator Hugh Segal and, perhaps, former prime minister Brian Mulroney.


Jeez...the whole time I was under the impression that Mulroney was an archetype of BLUE Tory neo-conservativism and it was the 'populist' Reform Party that initially tried to follow the 'western populist' traditions of the Red Tory...??

But as Zolf says, Zolf left the party because the party had changed--another way of looking at it, the party changed and left Zolf and his ideas of 'red toryism' behind.

At the link, the first poster's comments (Nick Oliver | Halifax, N.S.) is quite insightful and accurate.

I was under the impression that Mulroney was an archetype of BLUE Tory neo-conservativism and it was the 'populist' Reform Party that initially tried to follow the 'western populist' traditions of the Red Tory...??

I think I see your problem: you think that the Reform Party was comprised of Red Tories, and that the Mulroney PCs were archetypical neocons.

I'm not sure what to say in response, other than to suggest you read up on what's gone down politically in Canada since the 1980's.

- B

whatever...but since YOU KNOW that I am mistaken, why not take the time to 'correct' then instead of saying I am wrong and don't know history...apparantly you do, so I am all eyes?

LOL...

Quite right.

My observation is that the Reform Party was basically hostile to the welfare state, advocated limited government involvement in just about any area of social policy, opposed central government action if action by any lower jurisdiction could suffice, campaigned for tax cuts and against government spending, for smaller government, etc. These are all hallmarks of (Straussian) neocon domestic policy.

As for Mulroney, while he himself was quite US-friendly, especially on bilateral issues (e.g. Free Trade) he went his own direction on some key international issues (like South African apartheid, Israel, etc.) He was also a strong supporter of the UN, and of multilateral international action. Meanwhile, the electoral coalition that kept him in power was basically Red Tories in English Canada plus nationalists in Quebec with a federalist bent.

- B

the posted topic is about what Zolf thinks...

He thinks he's 'lewis socialist', a 'red tory', an 'NDP'er', and 'worship(per) of (Dalton)Camp'?

..."I watched with horror as the New Left Waffle wing of the NDP turned on Lewis and organized labour in 1971, branding him unfit to lead the party he had founded and labour as too American."...

Well his horror was shortlived because Lewis tossed the New Left Waffle out of the Party and that pretty much finished the NDP...then Zolf, by his own admission, moved on...?

I am not going to dignify either your opinion or his...I lived in the 80s...Mulroney was clearly a neo-con in the Thatcher/Reagan mold and that was the point of the most debate in the Left.

Clark was the Red Tory and that's what Mulroney and his supporters were claiming on the convention floor to get rid of in the CPC--Lyin' Brian was proud to be a Blue Tory. I could go on about Reforms' break with the CPC, but they are lots of material on the subject, including Manning's own biography.

Sorry you missed it...

The ever-combatative MrPrax wrote...

I am not going to dignify either your opinion or his...

I'll remember that next time you ask me to expand on my thoughts.

Our fact-challenged correspondent then wrote:

I could go on about Reforms' break with the CPC, but they are lots of material on the subject, including Manning's own biography. Sorry you missed it...

Actually, Reform didn't "break with the CPC", since the CPC didn't exist when Reform was around. What happened was that the successor party to Reform -- the Alliance -- eventually united with the Progressive Conservative Party to form the new CPC.

And I did indeed read Manning's bio when it came out, and still have my volume handy. Could you site the references that would bring into question my earlier assessement?

- B