By Jonathon Van Maren
If you just read the news, you would think that Canada is an enormously progressive place, filled with cheery lefties who take their toddlers to Pride to twerk with the leather dudes, free abortions throughout all nine months of pregnancy for whoever wants one, and universal disdain for the dark, evil past from whence we all came (unless you go far enough back. It was great before any non-aboriginals came here. Not that we dislike immigrants, or anything. They are also great.)
But the reality, as I pointed out in a column last week, is quite different. Red Tory Jean Charest, according to some sources, decided not to run for the leadership of the Conservative Party after internal polling indicated that a significant percentage of the membership holds socially conservative views. In fact, polling this past summer found that a full quarter of Canadians still support the traditional definition of marriage, with less than 50% of Canadians of East Asian and South Asian descent supporting the idea of same-sex marriage. That debate might be closed, sure. But socially conservative views are far from rare in Canada.
Socially conservative views are fairly common, but it seems these days that the Conservative Party wants to ensure that social conservatives do not have a political home in their big tent. It isn’t just their refusal to even consider the idea, supported by a majority of Canadians, that perhaps abortion should be restricted at some point during pregnancy (in fact, most Canadians think we already have such legislation.) As Chris Selley pointed out recently in the National Post, the membership of the Conservative Party holds views that differ wildly from party bigwigs who are trying to get woke as fast as possible:
On “so-con issues,” Conservative supporters stand out where you would expect them to: 61 per cent say Pride parades “are not for me,” versus just 12 per cent of Liberals; 68 per cent agree “there should be a law prohibiting abortion during the third trimester … unless the health of the mother is in danger,” versus 39 per cent of Liberals; and 84 per cent agree minority Canadians “should do more to fit in better with mainstream Canadian society,” versus 36 per cent of Liberals.
Did you catch that? Almost 40% of Liberals think we should have abortion restrictions. And yet, over and over again, genuinely conservative Canadians have to listen to clueless media pundits who view those with different belief systems like they’re on a National Geographic safari inform Conservative Party officials that they cannot win elections by supporting policies that have majority support from the Canadian public. And those Conservative Party officials then take a break from whining about how much the media hates conservatives to accept this nonsense, hook, line, and sinker. Try and figure that one out for a minute.
Chris Selley mused that “surely [social conservatives] would be far better off building their own movement…[rather] than endlessly begging in vain for table scraps from a party that clearly does not want them around.” Incidentally, he’s not the first one to suggest it.
11 thoughts on “The Conservative Party of Canada will lose federal elections every time if social conservatives walk away”
There is a party in Canada full of socons who will welcome more! #CHP
They’ve proven that they are not electorally viable and have no intention of becoming so. Considering the forces we face now and how much worse things are likely to be in the coming years, we need people who are actually wiling to create an infrastructure and get elected (like the Reform Party or, if we want to look fringe, the Green Party.) So-cons need representation in the legislatures, not a place to offload their votes in a way that satisfies their conscience but accomplishes nothing. That’s my view, anyhow.
Thank you Jonathon for stating that very clearly.
Could you write about that strategy specifically, and use RightNow as an example of strategic action?
Considering we get no money from the government for campaigns CHP has a good infrasture. Biased or partisan comments from pro life people and organizations has stopped people from joining a pro life party. Pro lifers have worked with the CPC but the party and leader have not succeeded either. Time,energy and money is not wasted on getting pro life and conservative policies by the CHP. It’s already got those policies. We just have a challenge to get the message out.
Jonathon, I appreciate very much your voice for the voice-less. Be encouraged to press on. But I must say your comment regarding the CHP is both disingenuous and disparaging and not becoming of someone with your confession. You you do not know the hearts of the 18,000 who did vote for the CHP. Your comment was a belittling of those who labour tirelessly within the CHP for the return of Christian principles in government. You should apologize for your comment.
You rightly quote Chris Selley when he mused that “surely [social conservatives] would be far better off building their own movement…[rather] than endlessly begging in vain for table scraps from a party that clearly does not want them around.” It is clear that pinning your hopes on the so called Conservative Party is at this point in their history ‘begging in vain for table scraps’. Much more could be said but for the moment a private conversation may be the better avenue. Let me know if you are interested. Sincerely Peter Vellenga
I’m not pinning my hopes on the Conservative Party, and the time may be fast approaching that we need a different electoral vehicle. My take on the CHP’s political performance is based on the candidates recruited (many of whom did not quit their jobs or even put them on hold to run, thus indicating that politics was a side gig rather than something they were committed to professionally), the electoral performance of the party (no candidates elected since its founding in 1987, before I was born), and the ability of the party to recruit, expand, and activate a base to send people to Ottawa and defend Christian interests. If my comment in any way came across as disparaging anyone who voted for the CHP, I apologize. In ridings where there is no other pro-life candidate, I’ve encouraged people to vote CHP. But from a historical, strategic, and political perspective, there is also no evidence to see them as a viable alternative that will actually result in Members of Parliament defending Christian interests. Being a politician is a job, requiring a certain resume and a lot of professional know-how. Simply having the right convictions is not enough. It should be a pre-requisite, yes. But a pre-requisite. Again, that is just my opinion based on my own research and analysis.
Thanks for the clarification, Jonathon.
Most of us could not afford to take a month or two off work without pay, although some CHP candidates have. The larger parties have the advantage of receiving taxpayer funds to take care of expenses and keep their candidates going without a wage. We are fully member funded, which means that the commitment of our candidates to manage work, home, family and a campaign comes at great personal cost.
If Canadians will not vote for a party whose policies are pro-life, pro family and fiscally responsible, then we will not get a government based on those principles. We get what we deserve.
That is only true to a degree. Political parties cannot simply say: If we build it, they will come. This, in my view, is a key misconception of many smaller, issues-focused political parties. Rather, they have to actively determine how to attract voters in order to get elected. If the party is not attracting voters, or enough voters, that is the fault of the party, not the voters. That is how retail politics work. The job is to get elected. There are plenty of people who want a pro-life, pro-family, and fiscally responsible party, but don’t vote CHP for a wide range of reasons. A key reason is that the CHP is not seen as an electorally viable party for the reasons I noted in my above comment. I understand that there are people who disagree with this, and believe that a party must present its principles and its platform and people can choose to vote for it, or not. In today’s era, where things are getting worse for Christian communities very quickly (and are likely to continue to get worse in the years ahead), we need people who will actually be in the legislatures speaking to those concerns and defending our interests. I find it unlikely, based on the history of the party etc, that the CHP will fill that role.
The conservatives are firing bullets at their own feet. As a force, they only have a name, but the substance was dilute. The silent majority who still hold Christian values are less and less heard and considered. What I find interesting is, the Liberals are acting as if their view is the view of the majority of Canadian; but according to this article, when you add the % of Conservatives and Liberals that are against, let’s say, abortion in the third trimester (unless the mother is in danger) it is obvious that the majority of Canadian is tilting towards Pro-Life. So finally, what are the Liberals talking about? No wonder that they are speaking, shouting so loud to cover the voice of everybody else, no wonder they are buying the media to be in their corner, no wonder they implement laws projects, second per second, to give weight to their opinions, philosophy, and tendency; because they know that, left alone, they have no backbone to stand; without forcing them on people through all types of indoctrination, subterfuge, confusion, and coercion, they will all crumble down and come down to nothing.
The way to go from now for the real Conservatives is a let go and let God, to Leave and to Cleave, to come together and be united under the banner of Christ. I see those hardcore Conservatives leave and join CHP under a name that rallies them in a common cause. their majority and CHP’s majority will supersize all the rest.
TO JONATHON VAN MAREN. Thank you, Mr. Van Maren, first thank you for encouraging people to vote CHP where there was no pro-life candidate. For you to vent the way you did by pouring out your heart and sharing your point of view, we appreciate that We recognize that, what you said is maybe the point of view of many thousands who didn’t choose CHP as the best option, but have never taken the time to let us know. For this, we appreciate. We will examine what you said, work on what we can improve and let the Lord be God for the rest; because we are in it for the sake of our beloved nation and for God’s glory, not ours. For each one of us; this is a calling and He has the final say.
One thing I want to say. I AM SO PROUD OF THOSE IN CHP WHO, OVER THE YEARS, WORKED WITH A CLEAR VISION IN MIND, THEY TOILED WITH CONSISTENCY, PERSISTENCE, PASSION, AND RHYTHM TO BUILD CHP AND MAKE IT WHAT YOU SEE TODAY.
It takes time to build a high-rise, compares to a house, and even a mansion. It is not because the high-rise is not yet in the point where it can receive many under his roof that it will never.
With that in mind, no architect or engineer, abandon a construction site, to go work within another project or invest their time in a parallel project that will potentially give a quicker return on investment; or, throw the towel and abandon the site because what they are building takes months sometimes years to see the full manifestation of their vision. And even after the spaces are habitable, they will never be discouraged and site in a corner reminiscing, because too many units or suites are not yet leased or rented. NO, THEY DON’T. Instead, everyone comes together and works at it, until the building reaches his full capacity…
THIS IS WHERE CHP NEEDS PEOPLE LIKE YOU WHO WILL COME TOGETHER TO FILL THE ‘UNITS’ (Ridings), FILL THE BANK ACCOUNT, BRING TO THE TABLE OF DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, INNOVATIVE IDEAS, BEST SOLUTIONS TO ISSUES… Everyone who has been involved in CHP since it’s beginning has done phenomenal jobs!!!
I APPLAUD THEM!!! If you consider all the odds against them, especially those who are doing it full time, It is AMAZING what CHP has accomplished!!!
I AM SO PROUD OF ALL THOSE WHO NEVER THROW THE TOWEL BUT KEPT WORKING ON THE CHP VISION.
Our forefathers and fathers built something so solid that it will NEVER fall, disintegrate or crumble. They’ve been enlarging the ‘space of CHP’s tent’, they’ve been building TLC’s capacity, and it takes time.
BUILDING CAPACITY TAKES TIME, PATIENCE AND A BULLDOG FAITH.
It takes faith to keep watering… And faith, they have it in abundance.
CHP is about God’s principles, solid foundations and an unshakable structure that will stand the test of time.
Mr, Van Maren, It doesn’t matter what you, I or others see, now, of CHP; its future is bright!
Sir, you said that made your research and it is honorable, allow me to ask: Who says that we have to do politic like politic has been done for decencies?!?!?! Why not rethinking, doing things innovatively.
“It will be of CHP what eye has not seen nor ear heard”; because what God will do through it will “not be done by might, nor by power, but by the Spirit of the Living God”.
LIKE JOSEPH WE WILL ARISE AS SOLUTIONS WITH SOLUTIONS.
ONCE AGAIN THANK YOU TO ALL WHO TOILED AND KEPT THEIR FAITH AND THE VISION ALIVE.
HONOR & RESPECT!!!!
My best regards to our leader ROD TAYLOR and those who are faithfully assisting him fulfilling destiny and those who joined him as sympathizers, donors, sponsors, members, candidates to push the vision forward and higher.
P.S. Mr. VAN MARENI My respect for your apology to those faithful men and women in CHP.
“Humility is the wings to mount up like eagles and do exploits for God” (Dr. Ralph Dartey)
You showed humility by apologizing, therefore you will go farther and higher.