The Canadian Manifesto: Chapter One: Movement Conservatism

The Canadian Manifesto: How the American Neoconservatives Stole My Country

In March of 2010, it was revealed that several wealthy Alberta ridings had sent cash and staff to poorer ridings in Ontario and Quebec. (1)

Jason Kenney, Rob Anders and Stephen Harper, all confident in their bids for re-election, helped to finance several campaigns, including that of Conservative MP for Nunavut, Leona Aglukkaq.  Shelley Glover, Saint Boniface, Manitoba, was another recipient.

What made the transfers questionable, was the fact that they did not report them to Elections Canada as "transfers", the way they should have, but as "donations".

However, while the media focused on that story, it was a comment made by Rob Anders that got my attention. "If people are true movement-oriented Conservatives, then it makes sense they would support those candidates and show up and support them and cut cheques."

I had heard the term "Movement Conservatives" many times, in relation to the New Right movement in the United States, and certainly recognized that the Reform-Alliance-Conservative Party, in all of its manifestations, was a "movement", and not just another political party.

However, in a moment of clarity, I realized that they are just part of the broader American movement.  Rob Anders had studied at the Leadership Institute (2), Morton Blackwell's training centre for conservative political activists.  (Other graduates included Karl Rove and Christian Coalition's Ralph Reed).

Blackwell is a key player, having worked on the campaigns of both Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, and was instrumental in bringing in the Evangelical vote.  Blackwell, as I mentioned in the Introduction, also helped Preston Manning create the Manning Centre for Building Democracy, fashioned after the Leadership Institute. (2)

That revelation caused me to change the direction of my book.  This is not simply about our Christian Right attempting to create a Canadian theocracy, nor is it about our now having a neoconservative government.  This is about the fact that the American conservative movement has taken over Canadian politics.

And that should be troubling to everyone.

".... your country, and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world." Stephen Harper.  Speech to Council for National Policy, 1997.  Made at the invitation of none other than Morton Blackwell. (3)

Movement Conservatism 101

In his book The Conscience of a Liberal, Paul Krugman discusses the fundamentals of "Movement Conservatism".  He says that the first step was to build "a base".  How often do we hear of Harper's "base".  It has become so common that the media now use the term matter of factly, no longer explaining who they are, what they are, or why he even has one.

"The base" has become more than just a group of loyal supporters, but people conservatives feed off, when they need a little noise, to drown out those opposing their actions.

When the debate over whether or not to fund abortions overseas, as part of the government's maternal health initiative heated up, Harper's then Chief of Staff, Guy Giorno, told his boss to  “protect the base.” (4)

Karl Rove would often advise George Bush of the same thing (5).  Protecting the base was first and foremost.

Blackwell once wrote a letter to a newly elected Republican, and offered his advice on "the base".  "Your constituency is the voters, especially the coalition which elected you. You can't count on the news media to communicate your message to your constituency. You must develop ways to communicate with your coalition which avoids the filter of the media. Focus on your base. Write to them. Meet with them. Honor them. Show yourself to be proud of them. Support their activities. Show up at their events."

He also advised that you should never betray your base, by "outing them", if they wanted to remain in the shadows.  That he claimed would be "politial suicide".
But the creation of a base has many levels.

Populist Level -  The populist base, or what both Richard Nixon and Stephen Harper referred to as the "silent majority", are perhaps the most important element of movement conservatism, and in fact without them, there probably never would have been a movement at all.

The New Right learned how to tap into the insecurities and prejudices of a segment of the population that had become disenfranchised with feminism, gay rights and "political correctness".  Reserving their comments for like minded souls, they were instead told to let it out.  They weren't wrong.  It was only the liberal society that was tramping on their rights.

As early as the 1950s, the National Review, edited by a young William F. Buckley, was defending the right of the South to prevent blacks from voting—"the White community is so entitled because it is, for the time being, the advanced race".  (6)

A decade later, Ronald Reagan joined the movement, and without being overtly racist, made it clear, that he too was on their side.  When he gave his first major speech in 1964,"A Time for Choosing," it was drafted to feed off paranoia.  As Krugman says of Reagan, "His early political successes were based on appeals to cultural and sexual anxieties, playing on the fear of communism, and, above all, tacit exploitation of white backlash against the civil rights movement and its consequences."

He would carry that into his federal campaign and in 1980, stumped about states' rights (as in the right to continue policies of segregation), at Philadelphia, Mississippi, where three civil rights workers had been murdered by the Klan.

In Canada, when the Reform Party was organizing, they too established a base of  "white nationals".  And while Stephen Harper and Preston Manning were careful not to write extremist views into their policies, the message got through.

According to Trevor Harrison in his book Of Passionate Intensity: Right-Wing Populism and the Reform Party of Canada

"... the notion that some Reform members may have strong Anglo-Saxon nativist inclinations is supported by more than merely the background profiles of its leaders, members and supporters. It is supported also by the words of many of its ideological mentors who depict Canada as not only historically an Anglo-Saxon country but also part of a wider Anglo-Saxon culture that is in need of recognizing and re-establishing its heritage. (7)

They also fed off fears, brought on by immigration and  a communist threat.  But while leaders of the American movement stood with their base against blacks, the Reformers stood up to Quebec, who they claimed were getting special favours from Ottawa; and forced bilingualism.

Business Level - Their populist base provided the noise, but they still needed money, and for that they tapped into the corporate sector, with promises of lower taxes and massive deregulation.  And by standing with corporations against unions, they easily created a base of the monied elite.

These people provided the funding for the think tanks, while the populist base provided the bodies for the Astoturf groups, even though they were often rallying against their own self interest.

Intelligentsia Level -  This level was created when "movement conservatism" joined forces with the Neoconservatives.  Milton Friedman of the Chicago School pushed back against Keynesian economics and the Welfare State, while men like Irving Kristol, who called himself the Godfather of Neoconservatism, produced scholarly papers promoting free market theories and denouncing "big government" solutions to social problems.

With an eager populace and more money than they could imagine, it became a smart career choice for many academics.  In fact, at all levels, those who worked for the movement, were never unemployed.  They moved from government to think tanks, and back again, always campaign ready.

The intelligentsia also created a special language.  One speech written for a politician, could mean one thing to the populace, another to the corporate sector and yet another to other intellectuals.  Krugman called it speaking in code.  When they targeted a specific group with their message, it is "dog-whistle politics".

A good example of this was when George Bush called himself a "compassionate conservative".  The masses heard "compassion", believing that he would protect the social safety net.  However, he was actually referencing the 1992 work of Marvin Olasky, who called for dismantling the welfare state, and putting social services into the hands of Christian organizations to dispense at their will.

David Kuo, one of the Evangelicals who helped to put George Bush in the White House, caught the reference, believing that the "faith-based" group he was part of, would be given funds to start a domestic ministry, to fight against poverty.

As it turned out, Bush had no such plans, and in the end only corporations benefited from any "charitable" initiatives.

By now many have picked up on the coded language.  "Choice" means "private",  "private" means "corporate",  and so on.  There are also phrases that are common to the group on both sides of the border.

"Tax relief" is a good example of this.

When the Globe reported that nearly all Canadian workers would pay more income and payroll taxes in 2011, Jim Flaherty's office responded by suggesting that all sectors benefited from "tax relief". (8) That was a common term used by the Bush administration, to ward off the same kind of accusations.  According to George Lakoff:  On the day that George W. Bush took office, the words tax relief started appearing in White House communiqués to the press and in official speeches and reports by conservatives .... (9)

Bush and Flaherty used "averages", instead of actualities.  G.W. announced that Americans would receive an average $1,083 in savings, when in fact the "average" American netted about $200.00.  The huge savings by the upper class distorted the "median".

Religious Level - This refers to the Moral Majority or Christian Right, who now greatly influence public policy in Canada and the U.S. 

Conservatives have painted themselves as the only party that believes in God.  Daivid Kuo in his book, Tempting Faith: An inside Story of Political Seduction, speaks of how the Republicans suddenly became the party of church goers.

At Sunday morning brunches around Washington, they appear in their "Sunday best", dressed as though they had just returned from "service", when in fact many had come directly from their homes or apartments.  It was important to keep up appearances.

With the Tea Party, has "movement conservatism" hit bottom?  They are certainly the embodiment of racist populism and religious extremism, funded by the corporate sector, and marching against their own self interest.

Now that we can put a name to the odd combination of forces, and have an idea of what a Harper "base" might look like, it's time to go back to where it all began.

1. Harper, Anders and Kenney ridings transfer to 'poor' Ontario ridings, By Tim Naumetz, The Hill Times, March 8, 2010

2. The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, By: Marci McDonald, Random House Canada, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-307-35646-8 3, p. 104

3. McDonald, 2010, p. 105

4. Guy Giorno: national man of mystery: PM’s chief of staff target for blame, but insiders say he gets big things right, by John Geddes, May 31, 2010

5. Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential, By James Moore and Wayne Slater, John Wiley & Sons, 2003, ISBN: 0-471-42327-0

6. The Conscience of a Liberal, By Paul Krugamn, W. W. Norton & Co., 2007, ISBN: 13 978-0-393-06069-0, p. 9

7. Of Passionate Intensity: Right-Wing Populism and the Reform Party of Canada, By: Trevor Harrison Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995. ISBN: 0-8020-7204-6, p. 105

8. Tax man to hit Canadian workers harder in 2011, By Sunny Dhillon, Globe and Mail, December 28, 2010

9. An introduction to framing and its uses in politics, By George Lakoff, Cognitive Policy Works, February 14, 2006

The Canadian Manifesto 11: God, Guns and Gays

Throughout the 1990s, especially the early years, the Canadian Reform Party and the American Republican Party were forging ties, that have proven to be lasting.

They share policies, initiatives, staff, and even financing.

One name that comes up often is Morton Blackwell, founder of the Washington based Leadership Institute, where young conservatives are trained in the art of political guerrilla warfare.  Karl Rove, Grover Norquist and Ralph Reed are all graduates of his program.

Blackwell was co-founder of the Moral Majority, and was Ronald Reagan's liaison with the Religious Right.  He once claimed that the Evangelical community was "the greatest tract of virgin timber on the political landscape."

It was Blackwell who invited Stephen Harper to speak at the Montreal conference of the Council for National Policy, an organization where foreign affairs and religion are mixed, and made to fit the Old Testament.  In other words, they promote perpetual war.

Blackwell was also called upon by Preston Manning to help him establish a Canadian branch of the Leadership Institute, giving birth to the Manning Centre For Building Democracy.  A dubious title for a training centre that teaches the art of undermining democracy.

His U.S. counterpart was more than happy to help out, saying that he offers his services for free, to any groups "trying to be conservative in the U.S. sense of the word". (1)

About God's Love of Guns

One of the advisers at the Leadership Institute is James Inhofe, the Republican senator from Oklahoma.  In 1994, the Republicans were determined to sweep the mid-term election, so pulled out all the stops.  Frank Luntz left the Reform Party and helped to draft the Contract With America, while Republican leader Newt Gingrich, studied Preston Manning's anti-government campaigning

The Evangelical army that had put Ronald Reagan on the throne, were once again mobilized for action and every right-wing group in the country was on speed dial.

But perhaps the most important factor in the success of the Republicans then, was when they put a gun in God's hands and changed the profile of a religious activist, from one wanting to do what was right, to one so filled with hatred that it now consumes them.

Because 1994 was the year when the National Rifle Association found a loophole in the election financing laws, and began to interfere in the democratic process.  They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to target Democrats who supported gun control, in particular, the Brady Act.

One campaign that was fought with NRA ammo was that of Inhofe, who was running against the incumbent Dave McCurdy.  With graduates from the Leadership Institute, including our own Rob Anders, McCurdy was shell shocked.

The NRA’s PAC spent more than $150,000 in independent expenditures to run television and newspaper advertisements and put up billboards denouncing McCurdy in addition to the $9,900 it gave directly to Inhofe, just under the maximum $10,000 allowable under FEC regulations. The NRA also spent thousands of dollars more urging its Oklahoma members to turn out for Inhofe. It was an all-out attack that turned the tide against McCurdy. (2)

Inhofe ran on a campaign of 'Gods, Guns and Gays', a slogan later borrowed by the Republican National Committee.  However, most NRA sponsored ads did not mention guns at all.  In one TV spot, they showed McCurdy at a distance and then zoomed in to reveal that he was wearing an Aids ribbon.

The same kind of gunfight took place across the country, as the NRA took up the cause for Republican hopefuls.  Christine Todd Whitman, the woman who loaned out her Common Sense Revolution to Mike Harris in Ontario,  garnered $ 200,000 in free ads.

Recognizing a good thing when they saw it, Harris's team then sent a letter to the Canadian branch of the NRA, the National Firearms Association, promising to do what he could to kill Bill C-68, and the Gun Registry.  The NFA published the letter as an encouragement for their members to get out and vote.

This was not the organization's first foray into conservative politics.  They had been active supporters of the Reform Party, and made a huge impact in 1997, when Reform became the official opposition.  According to the book Rebuilding Canadian Party Politics:

During the campaign, the NFA's political clout was put at the disposal of the Reform Party. In a memo to supporters, NFA president David Tomlinson noted that the only party offering a "trustworthy promise of an immediate turn toward dumping the Liberal game plan, revoking Bill C-68 and bringing in a completely tweeked firearms control system that will ... favor our firearms community is the Reform Party." Using images of war and battle, Tomlinson exhorted any member who was not a political activist to "get off your butt and become one".

During the 1997 election, signs bearing the somewhat ambiguous message "Remember Bill C-68 When You Vote" were a common sight in rural areas where gun ownership is concentrated. Part of the National Firearms Association's (NFA) extensive and ambitious campaign to defeat the Liberal government and the gun-control legislation it had supported. These signs signalled widespread discontent over firearms legislation in parts of the country.

He [Tomlinson]called on NFA supporters to work for, donate money, goods and services to, and promote the Reform Party". Tomlinson himself was president of a Reform Party constituency association in Edmonton. NFA activists apparently heeded Tomlinsons call. Messages posted on the organization's website throughout the election reflected considerable involvement in Reform campaigns,. Activists compared notes about the travails of keeping Reform signs in place, boasted about their campaign activity and contributions, and called for volunteers to help at local Reform offices.(3)

The New Right movement has many "signals" and according to David Kuo, the term "believers' is assigned to anyone believing in three things: the end of abortion, the end of gay rights, and the right to carry a gun. In an oped piece Harper wrote in 1995, he claimed that Reform was about "Gays, Guns and Government Grants".

He was a "believer".

Gun Control is Not a Liberal Issue

In their effort to make everything liberal evil, the New Right has called gun control, besides a feminist plot to destroy their masculinity (honest), a 'liberal folly'.  However, the idea of gun control, was actually a conservative priority.

Richard Nixon once said that "guns are an abomination," and went on to confess that  "Free from fear of gun owners' retaliation at the polls, he favored making handguns illegal and requiring licenses for hunting rifles."

George Bush, Sr. banned the import of "assault weapons" in 1989, and promoted the view that Americans should only be allowed to own weapons suitable for "sporting purposes."

When Ronald Reagan was Governor of California, he signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street." 

Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. "I support the Brady Bill," he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, "and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay." 

After all, the act was put in place because he was shot, and named after the man who died protecting him.

Republican Rudolph Giuliani, former mayor of New York City, actually sued 26 gun manufacturers in June 2000, and his police commissioner, Howard Safir, proposed a nationwide plan for gun licensing, complete with yearly "safety" inspections.

Another Republican, New York State Governor George Pataki, on August 10, 2000, signed into law what The New York Times called "the nation’s strictest gun controls," a radical program mandating trigger locks, background checks at gun shows and "ballistic fingerprinting" of guns sold in the state. It also raised the legal age to buy a handgun to 21 and banned "assault weapons," the sale or possession of which would now be punishable by seven years in prison. (4)

In Canada, the first aggressive gun control, was at the request of then Ontario Conservative Premier William Davis.   After a student opened fire at the school his daughters attended, killing one teacher and injuring 13 students, he sent his attorney general, John Clement, to Ottawa to meet with the Liberal government.

Armed with a petition bearing thousands of names of Brampton residents, demanding better gun control, Clement met with federal Justice Minister Otto Lang and Solicitor General Warren Allmand to review possible amendments to the Criminal code. (5)

Though Clement failed to get re-elected, he is credited with the passing of  Bill C-51 in 1977, that came into affect on January 1, 1978:

The two biggest changes included requirements for Firearms Acquisition Certificates (FACs) and requirements for Firearms and Ammunition Business Permits. Other changes included provisions dealing with new offences, search and seizure powers, increased penalties, and new definitions for prohibited and restricted weapons. Fully automatic weapons became classified as prohibited firearms unless they had been registered as restricted weapons before January 1, 1978. Individuals could no longer carry a restricted weapon to protect property. Mandatory minimum sentences were re-introduced. This time, they were in the form of a 1-14 year consecutive sentence for the actual use (not mere possession) of a firearm to commit an indictable offence. (Wikipedia)

And for the record, John Clement is Tony Clement's stepfather.

Gun control is not a partisan issue.  It is a Canadian issue.

This past election, gun lobbyists were again out in full force.  Mark Holland, former Liberal MP for Ajax-Pickering, was targeted by several groups, including Gun Nutz.  The Conservatives wanted him gone because he had been a vocal supporter of both the Prison Farms and the Gun Registry.

What does it say for the future of our democracy, when those wanting to create a Canadian "Gun Culture", can affect the outcome of an election?  And what does it say for Christianity, when the devout are behind them?

Using Romans 13 that establishes the "boundaries of governments", they are now advocating that we all should be armed.  And they wonder why people are leaving churches in droves.  How is this inspiring to anyone?

The truth of the matter is, that the New Right saw an opportunity for support from gun lobbyists, who are financed by gun manufacturers.  The potential outcome of the end of gun control, is not important.  Only the money and the power.

Conservative insider, Tom Flanagan, said that Stephen Harper wrote the Reform Party gun policy, only stopping short at calling it a right to bear arms.  This has nothing to do with long guns, or farmers, but is to appease those who want bigger and more lethal handguns, and want the right to carry them anywhere.

They claim that the streets will be safer.

If that were the case than the United States would be the safest country in the world.

It's not.

Sources:

1. The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, By: Marci McDonald, Random House Canada, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-307-35646-8 3, p. 104-105

2. Political Snipers, By Robert Dreyfuss, American Prospect, September 21, 1995

3. Rebuilding Canadian Party Politics, By R. Kenneth Carty, William Paul Cross, Lisa Young, UBC Press, 2000, ISBN: 978 0774 807784, p. 99-100

4. Don't Blame the Liberals for Gun Control, by Richard Poe, Studies in Reformed Theology, Volume 11, 2001

5.  Another School Shooting, Thoughts From up Here, March 22, 2005

Chapter Seventeen: The Campus Leadership Roles of Morton Blackwell and Preston Manning

The Canadian Manifesto: How the American Neoconservatives Stole my Country

In 2006, Cliff Fryers, Chair of the Conservative Party’s 2005 policy conference, and Preston Manning, former leader of the Reform Party, sat down with Morton Blackwell, founder of the American Leadership Institute.  Blackwell, a former Special Assistant to President Reagan, and longtime activist for the Conservative Movement, was eager to assist his Canadian colleagues, who had also been involved with the movement for decades.

Fryers and Manning were interested in starting their own Leadership Institute in Canada, based on the strategies and techniques of Blackwell's successful school of instruction in the art of dirty tricks.  Grover Norquist, Ralph Reed and Karl Rove, are all former graduates, and according to Marci MacDonald, 700 Canadian graduates of Blackwell's school, are working for the movement in Canada. (2)

Manning won't say who provided the $10 million single donation that was the seed money for his Manning Centre for Building Democracy, but when it was established, Cliff Fryer was named its director (3).  Fryer has worked with the Reform-Alliance party from its inception and knows how the game is played.

Until recently, Fryer was the chairman of the Enmax Corporation's board of directors, the Calgary owned utilities company.  However, he was forced to resign for backing former CEO Gary Holden, who was fired  following the discovery that he took a trip to the French Riviera, courtesy of a company that does business with Enmax.  According to other board members, Fryer’s resignation was "for the best".  Said one: “Well there's a few of us that weren't all that enthused about some of the comments that he made back when we were having some issues with Enmax and some of the things that had transpired over the years so we kind of were advocating for his resignation ... " (4)

According to Rick Bell, columnist for the Calgary Sun, Holden's parting shots were typical.

He insists he's done nothing wrong while speaking of "intrigue," the "motives" of "business and political forces," the attacks on Enmax, the biased media reports not telling the true story, his self-styled high-minded decision to depart and his possible future career as a politician.

When all is said, Holden does what he does best and what Enmax board chairman Cliff Fryers also does best.  He doesn't tell us anything of substance when asked but then uses one-way e-mails or a bully pulpit to play victim, casting other supposed sinister sorts as the source of what is the ongoing soap opera over at Enmax. (5)

This is what most neoconservatives do.  Blame someone else.

Another High-Profile Visitor

While Morton Blackwell was discussing the nuts and bolts of his operation to Preston Manning and company, Ralph Reed of the Christian Coalition, was the featured speaker at an election training program hosted by the Charles McVety's Canada Family Action Coalition.  (6)

Reed counsels social conservatives to practice “stealth politics” and “fool voters” by “hiding their religious agenda and instead promoting popular issues such as tax reform.” (7) The merging of neoconservatism with misguided Evangelism, to create what Noam Chomsky calls. "The religion of market knows best".  At least part of it is based on deceit.

In attendance at Reed’s strategy session, were Tim Dobson, Conservative Candidate for Pickering-Scarborough East, John Carmichael, Conservative Candidate for Don Valley West (won in 2011), Michael Mostyn, Conservative Candidate for York Centre, Rhondo Thomas, from McVety's Christian College, and Jim Flaherty, now our finance minister.

Reed told the assembled activists and candidates about the philosophical approach that should motivate their activities: “We're not trying to change a church into a political party, and we're not trying to change a political party into a church, but if the people of the church don't get involved, somebody else will.” (6)

Reminds me of an old Irish proverb that my father told me "If God doesn't change you, the devil will", his loose interpretation of religion.  Clearly, the devil is at work here.

What They Teach at Manning's Campus Leadership Training Program

In March of 2009, a Conservative Party workshop was held at the University of Waterloo. A student who attended was clever enough to take a tape recorder and what was revealed from the meeting was a clandestine attempt to take over student unions, by setting up a series of front groups.

This operation is one of the strategies taught at the Manning Centre's Campus Leadership Training program.  From their website:

Has your student government been overrun by extreme left-wing students?

Is freedom of speech being infringed upon on your campus? Are groups on campus using student money to further a left-wing agenda? Do you want to get organized and fight back?

Then the Manning Centre’s Campus Leadership Training is for you. Campus Leadership Seminars introduce aspiring political leaders on campus to the principles and practices of effective political involvement. Topics for these seminars include:

»The Fundamentals of Campaigning
» Political Communications
» How to run an effective Campus Club
» How to win campaigns on campus
» How to build effective coalitions

What they teach, however, is something a little different.

Audio recordings, photographs and documents that were leaked from a recent Conservative Party student workshop in Waterloo expose a partisan attempt to take over student unions and undermine Ontario Public Interest Research Groups (OPIRGs) on campuses across Ontario. 

At a session held in early February by the Ontario Progressive Conservative Campus Association (OPCCA) and the Manning Centre for Building Democracy, campus Conservatives, party campaigners, and a Member of Parliament discussed strategies to gain funding from student unions for the Conservative Party and ways to run for—and win—positions within student unions. (8)

What Manning had instructed the students to do was to set up "front" groups, all linked to a central organization.  In this way they could get funding for each group, despite the fact that they were not independent.  The Member of Parliament they speak of was Peter Braid, Conservative MP for Kitchener-Waterloo.

Blackwell's Leadership Institute is running the same kind of clandestine operations as Manning, under their Campus Leadership Program.  Journalist Jeff Horowitz went under cover at one of their summer seminars, where they taught their students how to manipulate elections.  One tactic was to volunteer to help run the election, and then place the ballot box in an obscure location, with little foot traffic.  Conservatives would know well in advance where it was. (9)

They also provide funds for a campus newspaper espousing conservative theories, and "front" groups for the Young Republicans.

The structure of Blackwell's Campus Leadership Program is simple. The Leadership Institute trains promising conservative college graduates over the summer and dispatches them to campuses in the fall with a mandate to start conservative student organizations.

Need $500 and some ideas to start a combative right-wing campus publication? The institute would love to help you. Unlike chapter-based political organizations, CLP clubs are unaffiliated with either the Leadership Institute or each other. According to Blackwell,this trait offers a serious advantage: "No purges." The clubs' independence also comes with the benefit of plausible deniability. "You can get away with stuff that you would take a lot of flak for doing in the College Republicans." (9)

Creating mini-me Ralph Reeds and Karl Roves on both sides of the border.

Sources:

1. Bloodshed on the floor was inevitable, By Siri Agrell, National Post, March 21, 2005

2. The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, By: Marci McDonald, Random House Canada, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-307-35646-8

3. Manning Centre for Building Democracy, http://www.manningcentre.ca/

4. Enmax chairman Cliff Fryers resigns, CBC News, September 8, 2011

5. Watt is this guy thinking? By Rick Bell, Calgary Herald, January 22, 2011

6. US Political Wiz Ralph Reed Urges Canadian Social Conservatives to ‘Make History’ This Election,”, LifeSiteNews.com, December 2, 2005

7. Secrets and Ties, By Bill Berkowitz, Media Transparency, April 17, 2005

8. Conservative Party strategy to take over student unions exposed, By Rebecca Granovsky-Larsen, Editor-in-Chief and Nora Loreto, News Editor, Ryerson Free Press, March 16, 2009

9. My Right-wing Degree, By Jeff Horwitz, May 24, 2005