This subject is fast becoming my sole pre-occupation!
In short, three things:
1. Lack of institutional infrastructure/support for conservatism (see the article.)
2. Conservative people are ghettoized and not part of the cultural mainstream; conservative ideas are considered extreme and sometimes even "un-Canadian" as a result.
3. Absolutely no succession planning in Canada's "conservative movement."
Funny enough, all three of these problems existed in the U.S.A before 1964. William F. Buckley, Jr.* did more than probably anyone to change that.
A great article came out in Saturday's New York Times which reinforced why point #3 is so crucial. It touches on Buckley, current debates within the movement, and other topics. I would encourage everyone to read this excellent piece. A snippet:
Rearing new conservatives has long been a subject of keen interest to their [young conservatives'] elders. To counter what they considered the liberal dominance of the major universities and news organizations, a handful of conservative foundations has helped build a network of organizations to train young members of the movement, most prominently the 51-year-old Intercollegiate Studies Institute. It publishes journals and books, sponsors fellowships and administers a network of 80 conservative college newspapers.
"I think one of the principal, even signal, features of the conservative movement is its overriding concern for nurturing young people," said Jeff Nelson, 39, the institute's vice president for publications.
Mr. Nelson is dead right, and it's exactly what's dead wrong with the conservative movement here. Nothing of this sort occurs in Canada. There is absolutely no planning going on for the future whatsoever. This must -- and hopefully will -- change.
*I am thinking fondly of Mr. Buckley today: when I arrived at the office there was a nice letter in my mailbox from him thanking me for the article I wrote about his recent retirement. What a classy, classy gentleman he is.
