The unique Canadian monolith otherwise know as Stephen Harper’s hair, represents perfectly what, in my opinion, is wrong with modern conservatism. First, the term conservative has always bothered me because of its inconsistent usage. If by conservative you mean traditional notions of restraint, as well as being cautious and fiscally moderate, well fine then. But does that describe modern political conservatism? I don’t believe so. If it did, it’s not likely we would be engaged in ‘nation building’ projects like the current one in Afghanistan, which actually represents a lack of restraint with regard to foreign policy. The Canadian deficit is widely expected to swell in the coming year, which again does not show fiscal moderation (although in fairness, the global economic situation hasn’t helped). What then does Canadian conservatism stand for? In my opinion, it wants to identify itself with a kind of social conservatism deriving from a very American-like religious right. Keep in mind these are not the progressive conservatives of old, but rather what might be left of the latter if you were to squeeze them into a more concentrated form producing a condensed and monolithic product.

Speaking of hair… Harper’s hair is a seamless testament to what $500 can buy. It’s unmoving and frozen in time, rather like modern conservatism. It will never change. So, does Stephen Harper’s hair deserve a majority government? In a word, no. And Stephen (can I call you Steve?), if you like, I can give you the name and number of a great stylist. The change might be good for all of us…

Advertisements