To the Editor: For left-of-centre voters of all political affiliations, the Harper majority is a shock that takes a bit of getting used to. And there are various ways of rationalizing it, the most prominent being a temptation to explain it as an accident of vote-splitting.
After all, the Conservatives only won 39.62 per cent of the national vote, which means that over 60 per cent voted against them. When the 60 per cent gets its act together, things will surely return to normal in what is still a centre-left country?
Perhaps, but then again, perhaps not. A closer look at the vote suggests a different reality.
Essentially, the confusing factor is Quebec and the way in which its anomalous voting pattern masks what's going on in the Rest of Canada (ROC). Consider the following set of numbers from the last four elections:
Conservative Vote as per cent of ROC Total: 2004 36.72; 2006 40.14; 2008 43.32; 2011 47.65.
Over the four elections for which Stephen Harper has led the Conservatives, their share of the ROC vote has risen steadily, a gain totalling almost 11 percentage points over seven years. Jean Chretien never managed a similar feat for the Liberals. And neither did Pierre Trudeau.
Of course, it can be argued that excluding Quebec from a review of voting trends is itself an artificial construct. After all, Quebec is a part of Canada.
But Quebec is also quite different from everyone else, a difference that embraces history, language and culture. And further, it's a difference that everyone acknowledges and Quebec proudly proclaims.
But if it's legitimate to consider the political identity and aspirations of Quebec, then it's equally valid to focus on the identity and aspirations of the ROC. And to do that, to fully understand what's happening politically, it's necessary to separate the Quebec vote from that of the ROC.
When we do, we see something very clearly. Rather than winning an accidental electoral victory due to vote-splitting, Stephen Harper is driving relentlessly towards an absolute voting majority in the ROC.
Put simply, he dominates the scene, reaching towards 50 per cent in a three-party system. That's impressive.
In fact, Harper is now a more dominant figure in the ROC than Pierre Trudeau was at the height of Trudeaumania! If that seems a stretch, consider the following:
ROC Vote per cent: Pierre Trudeau's Liberals 1968 42.35; Stephen Harper's Conservatives 2011 47.65.
At first blush, it seems incongruous. After all, everyone knows that the Canada of 1968 was swept up in the embrace of Trudeaumania. And we certainly don't live in an era of Harpermania. Indeed, the mere thought of that is ridiculous.
To an extent, the apparent incongruity is a function of Trudeaumania being a hyped phenomenon rather than a real one. In that giddy spring and summer, large chunks of the media fell head over heels for him. Consequently, a significant part of the excitement was driven from the top down, not from the bottom up. In a fundamental sense, it wasn't an authentic grassroots thing.
Still, it did have a genuine popular element. Trudeau was a charismatic, flamboyant, sexy figure in an era that put a particular premium on novelty. He did have a star quality. The contrast with Harper - the very essence of non-charisma - could hardly be more pronounced.
But charisma, and the emotion it evokes, can be a double-edged sword. When the infatuation fades, as ephemeral things often do, what's left behind can be a sense of disappointment, even resentment. This happened to Trudeau in 1972, when his first re-election campaign finished a bare two seats ahead of Robert Stanfield's lacklustre Tories.
A political appeal based on more substantive considerations, like values alignment and competence, has the potential to escape that rollercoaster. To be sure, there's always the possibility that events, or even mere voter fatigue, will upend the applecart. But then again, maybe not.
Although the prospect may drive left-of-centre voters to distraction, Stephen Harper could be here for the long-haul. To the extent that any political leader can be reasonably characterised as the authentic voice of his or her society, Harper can lay claim to being the true voice of the ROC in the early 21st century. Perhaps it's time to get used to it.
Pat Murphy, Toronto, ON.
