Template talk:Conservatism in Canada

People

Your people section was an over inflated history of every right-of-centre politician and media pundit of the last 30 years and had no sense of historical portion (aka presentism). I replaced it with a HISTORY section which will give readers more background on the long history of the right in Canada. I would consider supporting bringing the list of people back if it was constrained in some way. Or even broken down into subcategories (federal leaders, media people, academics and thinkers, etc.). But overall this is a worth project, so congrats on starting it. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 20:07, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

I have revised the list, with a simpler, modified version. It includes all Tory PMs and some other important figures. Let me know what you think, Kevlar. --VivaSlava (talk) 13:11, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Just a comment: Including important figures in these sidebars is common practice. See Template:Toryism, Template:Conservatism sidebar, Template:Conservatism US, Template:Nazism sidebar, Template:Communism sidebar, Template:Liberalism sidebar, Template:Socialism sidebar, Template:Social democracy sidebar, Template:Conservatism New Zealand, etc... -VivaSlava (talk) 13:17, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Improvement

@Ak-eater06: I abbreviated the terms and divided the "People" section into two subheadings—which is the standard format for templates of this kind. Also I added Jordan Peterson to the list, since he is the most famous Canadian conservative. Trakking (talk) 21:24, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

@Ak-eater06: If there is any single addition you have problems with then explain why. Too obscure? Too centrist? Etc. I added these people because Wikipedia identifies them as Canadian conservatives and thus ought to represent the Canadian conservative tradition. Trakking (talk) 17:11, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

User:Trakking I reverted per WP:BRD, because since this template has remained as it is for a long time, you need to get consensus and seek other editors' opinions (not just mine) before adding names.

I oppose most of these changes because most of these names are obscure and are not significant. The names already in place were former prime ministers, former premiers, and former writers who influenced and advanced the Canadian conservative movement (though I'm in favour of removing Aberhart considering his economic policy was not really conservative). Let's go by the people you've added:

• Mathieu Bock-Côté - Not prominent, and is more considered far-right than conservative; he is also more known for Quebec Nationalism than conservatism.
• Byfield - I support adding this as he founded multiple conservative news magazines and contributed to the founding of the Reform Party.
• Duhaime - He is just a leader of a provincial party with zero seats in the legislature. Just because he's conservative doesn't mean we have to add him. If we followed this policy, then we might as well add every single conservative MP and provincial/federal party leader.
• Levant - Far-right; not necessarily conservative.
• Granatstein - He's a historian and there's no citation on his page saying he's conservative; someone must have added the template without reasoning.
• Marsden - Not well-known and just because she's a conservative columnist and has a Wiki page doesn't mean she should be added; if we followed this policy we might as well add every single conservative columnist
• Peterson- I support adding this as he's pretty well-known
• Speer - I support adding this as he worked for the Harper government and was praised by Harper

Ak-eater06 (talk) 19:04, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. I wasn't sure you had valid reasons for reverting.

I will readd those you support, but I propose two more of them. Granatstein is obviously a conservative, judging by his topics and stances. See for example his work Who Killed Canadian History? where it also explicitly states that he is "known for his stinging neoconservative critique." Neoconservatism is an influential conservative school in North America. Marsden actually seems fairly known, since her Wikipedia is available in 8 different languages and her article (in English) generates quite a few views.

As for the others, you're right: we ought to exclude them from the template. Trakking (talk) 19:52, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

See my first comment. Why did you reverse this? It should not need consensus here as there already is a consensus that it is the standard format for templates of this kind. Also I added Conservatism in the UK and Upper Canada Tories as obvious related topics. Any objections? Trakking (talk) 20:45, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I oppose Granatstein because there is no citation in his page that he is "obviously a conservative". Also, that quote you cited is only from one person, and he is in general better known for being a historian than having political opinions. I also oppose adding Marsden because she was just a columnist who never wrote any significant books; also, her present-day works mainly revolve around American politics.

You also added more major changes without discussing them, which is why I reverted them. Ak-eater06 (talk) 20:47, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Conservatism in the United Kingdom is relevant because of links like Toryism and Loyalism. I suggest we add it. Trakking (talk) 21:05, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure if the distinction being made here between far right and conservative here is a significant one. Conservative and right-wing have a strongly overlapping meaning in this context. If this template includes various types of conservatives, and not specifically party members, then it will invariably include some important figures of the far right as well.

As an aside I also support including Granatstein. He's one of the most prominent conservative Canadian historians and popular writers. Dan Carkner (talk) 22:12, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

True—many so called "far-rightists" might as well be labeled national conservatives etc. It is a weird label. It is used to mean "fascism," but how many so called "far-rightists" are actual fascists? Also—historical fascists rejected the idea of "right and left," which they thought divided the nation, and they were often very socialist in their ideology: one-party state, totalitarianism, secularism etc. True far-rightist ("ultraconservative") movements were Francoism in Spain, Konservative Revolution in Germany, and Action Française in France. But they are quite rare.

I will readd Granatstein; he definitely seems like a relevant addition. Trakking (talk) 22:25, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

I think political terms are inherently slippery (often because of the people they are applied to and how they want to situate themselves in society) but the fact is any Canadian far right figure fits the description Wikipedia has for Conservatism fairly closely. If there was some kind of broad consensus on Wikipedia that the terms are very distinct it would be another matter. Dan Carkner (talk) 22:31, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Definitely think it's worth splitting the "People" section into "Politicians" and "Intellectuals"; I think it's a little weird to see prime ministers and premiers in the same mix as newspaper barons, etc. — Kawnhr (talk) 00:47, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Fixed it. Yes, this format looks way better. Trakking (talk) 10:00, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

We should add Lionel Groulx. One of the mentions of his conservatism in the article is sourced:

Groulx's conservative Catholicism was not very appreciative of other religions, although he also acknowledged that racism was not Christian, and he maintained that Quebec should aspire to be a model society by Christian standards, including intense missionary action. [Le Canada français missionnaire, Montreal, Fides, 1962].

Many conservatives were protectionists at certain times in certain places. Groulx has been included in the Conservatism navbox for quite some time. He is a proponent of Catholic conservatism in Quebec and he should qualify representation. Trakking (talk) 19:32, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Media

Hi. Seeing that it is defined as a Canadian Conservative publication on its Wikipedia page, I added The Post Millenial to the Media section of the template. Ottawajin (talk) 03:23, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

New additions

@Ak-eater06: While recognizing the rationale for removing a few of the new additions, I don't understand the removal of Rachel Marsden, who is identified as "a Canadian conservative political columnist and television commentator" in the article, especially since she seems to be fairly influential and has written for the Toronto Sun etc. Trakking (talk) 16:20, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

User:Trakking the article lead is not always accurate. Just because she wrote for the Toronto Sun doesn't mean her work revolves around Canadian conservatism. The article doesn't even mention her views on Canadian political issues. Ak-eater06 (talk) 16:25, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

My position is that Canadian conservatism cannot be understood as an entirely separate phenomenon from US conservatism, since the two nations constitute North America and influence each other. It would be a different thing to mix together US conservatism and British conservatism, where the association is more loose. Trakking (talk) 16:33, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Add a "Works" sub-section?

Containing e.g.:

• Who Killed Canadian History? (1998)

Biohistorian15 (talk) 06:40, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes! There are two works in the ”Related” section that could be added there as well. Trakking (talk) 06:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)