Populism and the quest for political power: the pitfalls to populist electoral success in Canada

The significant electoral gains of radical populist parties internationally have highlighted populism's polarizing potential. This polarization isn't independent of socio-economic and cultural divisions within liberal democracies. However, these divisions alone don't automatically translate to political polarization. Populist actors exploit existing grievances, intensifying polarization. This paper argues that despite Canadian socio-economic discontent, the absence of ingrained nationalism, the strength of multiculturalism, limitations on class-based politics, and the ineffectiveness of anti-American sentiment have prevented both left and right-wing populist forces from achieving national-level electoral success. The paper is structured into four parts: a discussion of populism as a concept; the relationship between socio-economic conditions and populism; the historical evolution of populism in Canada; and countervailing forces to populist success in Canada. Finally, the conclusion summarizes the main findings.

The concept of populism is widely debated, lacking a single, universally accepted definition. Three main interpretations exist: populism as a thin ideology presenting a binary societal vision; populism as a rhetorical discourse framing politics as a struggle between the people and the elite; and populism as a political strategy employed by outsiders to gain power through anti-establishment appeals. Mudde's definition of populism as a 'thin-centered ideology' dividing society into 'the pure people' and 'the corrupt elite' is considered, along with Wayland's minimal definition of populism as a political strategy. This paper uses a combined definition encompassing both divisive rhetoric pitting the people against the corrupt elite and a political strategy employed to gain power.

This paper employs a qualitative research methodology, primarily relying on a comprehensive literature review of existing scholarship on populism, Canadian politics, and Canadian national identity. The analysis integrates historical analysis of major populist movements in Canada, examining their platforms, electoral successes, and ultimate impact on the Canadian political landscape. The paper also draws on secondary data sources such as survey data and public opinion polls to contextualize the findings. The approach is interpretive, aiming to understand the complex interplay of factors contributing to the limited success of populist movements in Canada, rather than relying on quantitative methods to establish direct causal links.

Populism's rise and fall are linked to socio-economic conditions. The economic hardships of the 1930s fostered populist movements, while postwar prosperity diminished their appeal. The economic crises of the 1970s and 2008 revived populist sentiment, but its expression varied. Right-wing populism exploited ethnic and cultural divisions, while left-wing populism focused on economic inequality. In Canada, early populist movements (e.g., the Progressive Party) were short-lived or absorbed by mainstream parties. The Reform Party's rise in the 1990s capitalized on Western alienation and economic anxieties, but its transformation into the Conservative Party diluted its populist edge. The People's Party of Canada, representing a more recent right-wing populist effort, while gaining some traction, failed to achieve significant electoral breakthroughs at the federal level. The paper identifies four key variables that have constrained populist electoral success in Canada: 1) **Weak National Identity:** Canada's fractured nationalism, stemming from historical tensions and the established multiculturalism, limits the effectiveness of using ethnic nationalism as a mobilizing force. 2) **Consolidated Multiculturalism:** Multiculturalism's central role in Canadian identity necessitates that national-level parties avoid divisive rhetoric, thus limiting the appeal of anti-immigrant platforms. 3) **Subdued Class Politics:** The persistent conflict between Canada and Quebec has prioritized national unity, pushing mainstream parties to downplay class divisions and thus limiting left-wing populist efforts. 4) **Decline of Anti-Americanism:** The increasing economic integration between Canada and the US, along with declining economic nationalism, has reduced the potency of anti-Americanism as a mobilizing tool, particularly for left-wing populists. The absence of a single, unifying Canadian identity, coupled with these political and economic realities, limits the appeal of populist platforms at the federal level, despite some successes at the provincial level.

The findings suggest that while socio-economic grievances create a fertile ground for populism, its success in Canada is significantly constrained by cultural and institutional factors. Canada's commitment to multiculturalism and the absence of a strong, unified national identity have reduced the effectiveness of traditional populist appeals based on ethnicity and nationalism. The historical role of the Liberal Party in mitigating class conflict and accommodating regional interests has further limited the space for populist movements to gain significant traction. The paper highlights the complex interplay between economic conditions, political institutions, and cultural identity in shaping the electoral landscape, demonstrating how these factors have successfully limited the impact of populist forces in Canada at the national level.

This paper demonstrates that while socio-economic grievances fuel populist sentiment in Canada, its translation into national-level electoral success is hindered by unique factors such as a weak national identity, the established nature of multiculturalism, the limitations on class-based politics, and the decline of anti-Americanism. Future research could explore the evolving relationship between populism and regionalism in Canada, examining the potential for populist successes at the provincial level to influence the national political landscape. Further investigation into the changing nature of Canadian national identity in a globalized world would also be valuable.

This study relies on secondary data and existing literature, limiting its ability to capture the nuances of individual voter motivations and the evolving nature of populism. Furthermore, while the paper identifies significant factors, it does not quantify the precise weight of each factor in shaping electoral outcomes. Future research incorporating quantitative analysis, such as detailed survey data and in-depth interviews with voters, could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamics at play.