Incrementalism: The God that failed?
Book reviewed: Loyal to the Core, by Gerry Nicholls.
Joseph Quesnel - April 3, 2009
Loyal to the Core: Stephen Harper, Me and the NCC
By Gerry Nicholls, Freedom Press Canada Inc., 174 pages
Reviewed by Joseph Quesnel
Between recounting his own personal ideological journey, or providing a fascinating history of the National Citizens Coalition (NCC), or in giving us a glimpse into the heart of Stephen Harper, Gerry Nicholls has accomplished many things in his new book Loyal to the Core: Stephen Harper, Me and the NCC.
It is difficult to summarize, although this reviewer contends the main purpose is to demonstrate the pressing need for a strong conservative movement, separate from partisan politics, as evidenced by groups like the NCC. As a sincere advocate for conservative policies and a player in the conservative movement, Nicholls is qualified to provide this account and offer these suggestions.
He makes a strong case for the necessity of "political guerrilla warfare" and the need for direct, simple messaging within the movement.
In his book, Nicholls discusses the successes of NCC campaigns and argues persuasively that simple billboard messages, buttons bearing images of swine to represent greedy politicians, and clear examples of government waste rather than obscure deficit numbers, are betters ways of reaching the masses with a conservative message. Nicholls declares he is a supporter of negative advertising, which he says should be pursued because it works. One key strategy in guerrilla politics, he argues, is to have an enemy to rally supporters around. The NCC had that in Pierre Trudeau, Brian Mulroney, and Bob Rae. The public is better reached by these tactics than abstract intellectual arguments for freedom, although he sees a place for think tanks.
Nicholls presents the case that Harper’s parliamentary performance has proven that even ideologically-strong leaders like Harper are susceptible to “losing their way” when confronted with compromises that come with elected office.
The main purpose, in Nicholls’ own words, is to “set the record straight about Stephen Harper, me and the NCC.” For those living in a cave when it comes to federal politics, Nicholls was fired as vice-president at the NCC, not long after he began criticizing Stephen Harper’s government.
By way of personal disclosure, Nicholls theorizes about why he was dismissed. Although he never says for sure why he was fired, Nicholls point out that the NCC took a more pro-Tory tone after he left. This proves that movements should stay away from partisan leaders. He makes the claim that Harper's controlling personality is such that he wants to control the conservative movement, not just the party. Nicholls expresses these impressions, although they are unproven.
The main strength of the book is its compelling arguments for why we need a strong conservative movement to push conservative politicians to do conservative things. Nicholls uses the examples of the Reagan-Thatcher years, as well as Mike Harris. In his argument, however, Nicholls misses that even these stalwarts made compromises. Reagan did not turn back the welfare state or initiate massive spending cuts. In compromising with a Democratic Congress, he trimmed his ambitions (if he really intended to reinvent the state). Harris also had to pick his battles. While strong on welfare reform and tax cuts, he abandoned plans to privatize Crown corporations like the Liquor Control Board of Ontario.
Nicholls is quite right to point out that conservative politicians need not fear running on a principled platform. Perhaps a better question is which specific conservative ideas are best to run on and successfully gain support for.
Where Nicholls goes off the tracks a little is in his characterization of Harper and his early advisor Tom Flanagan. At the start of his book, Nicholls states Harper has obviously "sold his soul" to partisan politics and that he is not as committed to conservatism as he said he was. Nicholls brings evidence for his case, showing how Harper breached many traditional conservative ideas. It is fair to question discrepancies between what politicians say and what they do. Where it goes further is in making statements about someone's true intentions. If Nicholls claims that Harper "sold his soul," it is fair to ask him to produce the minutes from the meeting Harper had with the Devil.
There is wisdom in the saying that the perfect is the enemy of the good. While Harper has done many un-conservative things, he arguably has advanced some conservative goals, like in foreign affairs, the military, aboriginal affairs, and day care policy. Although Nicholls scoffs at it, there may very well be an "incrementalist" agenda. It may prove best to wait and see.
Despite these caveats, Nicholls is spot on about pointing out the dangers of a conservative movement too closely allied with the Conservative Party. He uses his own examples of the NCC office, which at one point came too close to Canadian Alliance leadership politics, even to the point of sharing staff and having Harper volunteers work out of the NCC office. To his credit, Nicholls eventually disavowed this.
There is always the danger that movement people will become subsumed and identified with partisan politics, which taints the movement. Nicholls was wise to bring that to our attention.
Page 1 of 2