A Francophone, Conservative, Federalist Montreal "Stockaholic"?
Incroyable!* |
My high school principal was giving me a stern look,
visibly not amused. It was March of 2001. I was 17,
and a few months away from graduating.
For the
first time during my five years of high school, I
had committed an act of light rebellion against
authority by skipping class on a Friday afternoon.
And unlike many other students who had done so
before me, I had been caught. How did I suffer such
a misfortune? Two words: Stockwell Day. My principal
had seen me on the evening news, shaking the
Canadian Alliance leader’s hand. You heard right: I,
a young francophone Quebecker, had skipped class to
attend a gathering of “Stockaholics” in Montreal.
My passion for politics started at a young age,
even though my parents were not particularly
political and we rarely discussed politics at the
dinner table. The issue that whetted my appetite was
sovereignty, Quebec’s all-consuming political debate
since the 1970s. As early as the third grade, I
would quiz my parents about their beliefs. Both were
staunch federalists, and even though I was a
contrary child in many ways, I trusted their
judgment on this big issue and became a federalist.
In the fourth grade, as class president, I organized
a mock referendum debate, where I played the role of
Quebec’s federalist leader. In retrospect,
subjecting my classmates to my mediocre talent for
self-promotion might have constituted an abuse of my
presidential powers—but it was so much fun!
My interest in politics grew stronger in high
school. Ever the contrarian, I self-identified as a
conservative, which caused satisfying consternation
to my social studies teachers who mostly held very
different political views. I read about politics and
history to inoculate myself against their left-wing,
separatist rhetoric, even trudging through Conrad
Black’s massive Maurice Duplessis biography just so
I could argue with my history teacher who, naturally,
despised Quebec’s former conservative premier. I
enjoyed being a rebel, and reveled in provocation.
Who knows, if I had been born in rural Alberta, I
might have become a Marxist!
The apex of my ideological awakening occurred
thanks to the Internet (props to you, Al Gore!). In
October 2000, I was surfing the Web in search of my
daily dose of right-wing political commentary when I
fell upon the website of the Cato Institute, the
well-known U.S. libertarian think tank. Having never
heard of libertarianism before, I was intrigued by
its radical ideas about the role of the state and
its relationship to the individual. When I learned
that Cato would be holding a “Cato University”
seminar in Montreal at the end of the month, I
immediately wrote to Tom Palmer, the director of the
program and a libertarian proselytizer extraordinaire,
and requested to attend. He gladly extended me an
invitation.
Cato University was an intellectual feast. For
the first time, I met ideological kindred spirits
and had the opportunity to exchange with and learn from
them. I learned that what I instinctively believed
in was, in fact, a coherent political philosophy.
Cato gave me the intellectual ammunition I needed to
debate with statists of all stripes.
After the Cato seminar, I returned to school with
the zeal of a convert. Exchanges such as the
following would often happen during class:
Teacher:
This year, our school charity campaign will fund an
initiative that aims to preserve and strengthen the
right of Ethiopian children to an elementary school
education. Yes, Paul?
Me:
Actually, education is not a “right.” It’s a
privilege. A right to education implies that you can
force others to pay for your education, thus
depriving them of their property.
Teacher:
Right, Paul. In any event, those kids don’t only
suffer from a lack of education. They work in
inhumane conditions, often for U.S.-based
multinational corporations.
Me (yelling):
TWO AND A HALF CHEERS FOR SWEATSHOPS!
I’ll admit it: I was an obnoxious know-it-all.
Shortly thereafter, I started immersing myself in
the writings of libertarian icons. I read Hayek,
Friedman, Rothbard, Mises and Rand (although I must
confess to never finishing Atlas Shrugged).
I also started writing about politics and
libertarian ideas for various publications,
including student newspapers, the Fraser Institute’s
Canadian Student Review, and Le Québécois
Libre, a French-language libertarian
webzine. I attended CEGEP at Collège
Jean-de-Brébeuf, Pierre Trudeau’s alma mater, and
founded the “Brébeuf Student Right” with a few
friends. We organized several events featuring guest
speakers on such politically incorrect topics as
“Why the Kyoto Accord is a Bad Idea” and “Why
Socialism is Evil.” This was not particularly
helpful to our social lives, and I must admit that
maintaining my virginity during those years was not
difficult.
|
“Thanks largely to Friedman
and Heinlein, a key pillar of economic wisdom is that
‘there ain’t no such thing as a
free lunch.’ However, students
interested in free-market and libertarian ideas might have
difficulty understanding this, due to the plethora of free
think tank-sponsored lunches and seminars they can attend.” |
Thanks largely to Friedman and Heinlein, a key
pillar of economic wisdom is that “there ain’t no
such thing as a free lunch.” However, students
interested in free-market and libertarian ideas
might have difficulty understanding this, due to the
plethora of free think tank-sponsored lunches and
seminars they can attend. As a student, I milked
these opportunities for all they were worth. Over an
approximately five-year span, from when I was in
grade 10 to the beginning of my law studies, I
attended seminars and conferences in exotic locales
such as Washington, Philadelphia, New York, Santa
Barbara, and Auburn, Alabama. Attending these
seminars deepened my understanding of libertarian
ideas and introduced me to new friends from all over
the world.
Of all the think tanks and organizations I have
encountered during my libertarian journey, the
Montreal Economic Institute undoubtedly had the most
significant impact in my life. Shortly after
attending my first Cato seminar in 2000, I showed up
at the Institute’s door on St-Hubert Street in
Montreal and introduced myself to Martin Masse, the
director of publications. We had an hour-long
discussion and I have been involved with the
Institute ever since, first as a freeloading student,
and more recently as one of their research
associates and as their corporate secretary.
It was through the Montreal Economic Institute
that I met Maxime Bernier, who would later become my
first boss. At the time, Bernier had recently become
Vice President of the Institute, and had authored a
study on the benefits of a flat tax. He would later
run for the Conservative Party in the 2006 federal
election.
As my interest in libertarian ideas was growing,
so was my involvement in partisan politics. During
my high school years, I had gotten involved with the
Quebec Liberal Party. The QLP had a very dynamic and
powerful youth wing, and held a huge convention
every summer. I rarely failed to air some radical
thoughts on some public policy issue that would
reverberate in the media, which raised the ire of
some within the party. I was a member of my riding
association executive, and was (rightly) perceived
as a loose cannon by some of my colleagues, who
really did not appreciate the NRA-logoed tie I used
to wear at riding association meetings. Eventually I
grew disenchanted with the muddled policy positions
embraced by the QLP and ceased my involvement with
them. When I resigned my position on my riding
association executive, I wrote a scathing letter to
my MNA informing him that I could no longer support
the Liberals’ socialist policies. For good measure,
the letter was laden with Ayn Rand quotes extolling
the morality of laissez-faire capitalism.
Federal politics was much more satisfying. I
volunteered for the Canadian Alliance during the
2000 federal election, helping my local candidate (who
did not have the slightest chance of winning) tack
electoral signs on telephone poles in the frigid
cold. A few years later, I campaigned for Stephen
Harper to become the leader of the newly-formed
Conservative Party. My involvement was rewarded with
a coveted internship in Harper’s office during the
summer of 2004, when he was Leader of the
Opposition. I volunteered countless hours during the
2004 federal campaign, which the Conservatives ended
up losing by a hair. It was a depressing time to be
a Conservative: Despite the Sponsorship scandal, the
Liberals had clung to power. If the Conservatives
could not beat them in such favourable circumstances,
how could they ever aspire to form the government?
But Harper, whom many had thought politically
dead in early 2005, won a surprise election victory
in January 2006 and became Canada’s 22nd
prime minister. Shortly before the swearing-in of
the new Cabinet, I received a call from Maxime
Bernier asking if I would consider joining his staff
as a policy advisor in his Industry portfolio. I
jumped at the offer. The Conservative win could not
have occurred at a better time. I was completing my
last semester of law school. Once I passed my final
exam, I headed to Ottawa right away.
Working for Minister Bernier was a dream come
true. It allowed me to apply the free market
principles I held dear to real-life public policy
issues. I developed an expertise in
telecommunications policy and regulation, which I
use to this day in my law career. More importantly,
working in a minister’s office helped me understand
how the machinery of government works, which only
affirmed my belief that free markets are generally
preferable to interventionist government. I will
always remember a particular scene: Bernier and I
were seated in an airplane and railing against some
federal government program or another. A man seated
across from us looked at Bernier and, with an
intonation akin to that of Sir Humphrey, said: “But
sir, you are the government.” We had
a good laugh.
Over the past thirty years, Quebec has maintained
an ever-expanding welfare state financed by debt and
equalization payments. It has instituted social
programs that no other Canadian province—no matter
how rich—considers within its means. Such runaway
government spending has come at a steep cost:
economic stagnation and the largest debt load in
Canada.
Quebec’s few fiscal conservatives have done our
best to stand athwart history (alongside W.F.
Buckley) yelling “Stop”—but to little avail, until
recently. Last year’s election of Philippe Couillard
as Premier of Quebec on a platform of lower spending,
less debt and freer markets, and the apparent rising
fortunes of the federal Parti Conservateur of late,
has given us hope that the province’s political
culture is finally shifting right. We now dare to
dream that conservative anglo-Canadians will soon
lay off attacking Quebec for its profligacy, and
instead focus on our spendthrift neighbour, Ontario.
* This op-ed was first published on March 1st, 2015,
in C2C Journal.
|
|
From the same author |
▪
The fed's wireless hangup: Does Canada really need
more players in its telecom market?
(no
322 – May 15 2014)
▪
Telecom Policy: Tony Clement's confusion
(no
287 – March 15, 2011)
▪
The War Against Creative Destruction: Why Government
Bailouts Only Make Things Worse
(no
273 – December
15, 2009)
▪
Les dessous des politiques antitabac
(no
162
– 15 janvier 2006)
▪
Pour la non-intervention
gouvernementale en matière culturelle
(no
160
– 15 novembre 2005)
▪
More...
|
|
First written appearance of the
word 'liberty,' circa 2300 B.C. |
Le Québécois Libre
Promoting individual liberty, free markets and voluntary
cooperation since 1998.
|
|