Way back in the 90s, Preston Manning admonished Reform party candidates as follows: "Don't tell voters what you really believe, get yourself elected first" (this is a paraphrase). That has become a mantra among conservatives since then.
Federally, the CPC under Harper had a significant "values" caucus (read: social/religious conservatives) who badly wanted to legislate against abortion, gay rights, and women's rights. Harper would throw them the odd bit of "red meat" - allowing a private member's bill to move along for a while - until it became apparent that if it actually got passed, the political price would be too high. Policy books were carefully curated, and unless you had a good eye for "dog whistle" language, most people would assume that the CPC was less radical than it actually was. Since Harper's departure in 2015, that mask has dropped, and the radicalized wing of the party has become increasingly powerful.
Provincially, the picture is similar across the country, with some truly egregious examples emerging in the western provinces. In Alberta, the UCP has undergone two internal coups, resulting in a party that has become increasingly radical and is legislating in a manner completely at odds with the platform they ran on in 2023. Nobody in 2023 thought they were electing a party that would spend political capital on attacking minority rights and separatism, yet here we are. Smith to this day denies that the party is in fact a separatist party.
Then we come to B.C., and the crumbling edifice of a "unified" conservatism under the BC Conservative banner. Two years ago, John Rustad led the BC Conservatives to a hair's breadth of attaining power. When he booted Dallas Brodie from caucus for comments that most people would describe as racist, that led to the formation of OneBC, and put his leadership under threat from factions of the party who apparently felt he wasn't "conservative enough". Eventually that led to his ouster and replacement by Kerry-Lynne Findlay after a lengthy and bitter leadership fight.
Findlay set about engaging in one of the most blatant purity purges any conservative party has ever witnessed, resulting in the collapse of her leadership in a record setting 112 days. This isn't an accident, and it isn't an aberration - it is exactly what you would expect when a party is made up of factions that simply don't see eye to eye on much. Sooner or later, the most radicalized faction will agitate and organize to seize control.
Which leads us to yesterday's revelation that the B.C. Conservatives are "in talks" with OneBC. Now, in itself, this is not surprising - parties often discuss what they might do in scenarios where together they might be able to seize power from a rival either through cooperation or even merger.
However, B.C. Conservative leader Lorne Doerksen made the following statement which I can only describe as ominous in the context:
Asked about the discussions Tuesday, Doerkson said there had been “nothing formal,” while reiterating his party’s commitment to embracing conservative values.
“That’s not up for conversation,” Doerkson said at the time. “We will bring conservative values, for certain, to the people of British Columbia.” (emphasis added)
What precisely does "conservative values" mean here? OneBC is, to put it kindly, on the extreme end of social conservatism, with distinctly racist, anti-2SLGBTQ policies permeating the party's policies. Lorne Doerksen's own comments should make anyone who isn't themselves a social conservative incredibly nervous:
I was supportive of the LGBTQ community. Always have been and always will be.
SOGI [Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity education resources] has been a lightning rod for division in this province. I think that SOGI has to be removed.
and ...
I've had friends that attended residential schools, and I have heard many stories from people that have survived those schools.
I'm absolutely supportive of our First Nations in this province.
If there has been a crime committed, then there needs to be an absolute, formal, deep investigation into what has happened here because I think all Canadians need to understand that better so that we can move forward on a better path
So, in short, anti-2SLGBTQ (because let's be honest, anyone who is bitching about SOGI is doing so because it includes that community and that gives them the squickies), and nothing like a little "soft residential school denialism" to show us the underlying racism. Does Mr. Doerksen not recall the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and its final report? We've had that investigation already.
Now we have the BC Conservatives playing footsie with OneBC? That should make anyone nervous - because OneBC was formed out of "the BC Conservatives weren't radical enough for us" thinking.
I'm not going to claim that the MLAs who left caucus under Findlay are the "reasonable ones" - I think they are the ones who were targeted by Findlay's purge for one reason or another, or they saw the political fallout of staying with Findlay on the wall and decided it would be better for their future prospects to depart.
Prior to the collapse of her leadership in September, there were already rumours of OneBC being invited to return to the BC Conservatives ... largely because KLF was already aligned with OneBC - and she was making that clear.
Doerksen is trying to play "the reasonable one" here, while tacitly signalling to the hardliners that he's on their side. That's the whole problem - conservatism in Canada is not a singular movement with a coherent set of beliefs. It is a collection of groups, all with distinctly different beliefs and values fighting for control over the "blue flag". The claim that there is "something in common" is a fantasy - the goal is power, and "leaders" emerge who will do everything they can to cobble together some kind of "alliance", only to have it fall apart in real time as they discover how radicalized some of the participants really are.
I've watched this script play out so many times since the 1990s that the first question I ask when someone tells me that they are "a conservative" is "which faction do you follow?". The least honest are always the ones with the most unelectable ideas.
