So What Will it be, Liberals? Top-Down or Bottom-Up?
By Gregory D. Morrow

Anyone who has followed Canadian politics over the past few years might have detected a slow shift in attitudes among voters, from top-down, one-size-fits-all processes and policies that have typically characterized our “good government” ethic, towards those that appeal to and, in many cases, are generated from bottom-up efforts led by local volunteers and activists.

These bottom-up, grassroots efforts reflect an emerging populism that is profoundly affecting Canadians’ expectations of government at all levels. While we easily locate conservativism on the right, fascism on the far right, liberalism on the left and communism on the far left, populism cannot be pegged to a particular location on the political spectrum. As Niall Ferguson once said, populism is a “bisexual ism”. It comes from both the left and right. And these grassroots efforts have successfully painted the Liberals as, on the left, handmaidens of “big business”, and on the right, handmaidens of the “elites”. While much of this is partisan rhetoric, it does underscore the degree to which Liberals are viewed as being disconnected from the grassroots. Indeed, Liberal success has typically come from mobilizing the elites, not the grassroots. But, as grassroots campaigns have matured (within a system that elects representatives locally), this populism is beginning to pay electoral dividends.

It is within this context that Liberals are renewing their party. And at heart, they must decide whether to recognize and embrace populism — that is, to redefine what a Liberal populism would look like — or to ignore it, falling back on the top-down solutions that have always worked in the past. So what will it be, Liberals? Top-down or bottom-up?

Let me be clear: mobilizing a bottom-up Liberal populism is not about simply pandering to sordid localized issues. Rather, it means giving the grassroots a legitimate stake in the rebuilding of the party and in the setting of policies. It means opening up the Renewal Commission to genuine debate with Canadians of all political stripes, rather than setting policies behind closed doors by a select few. It means endorsing a leader that understands and is willing to take the hard road of building grassroots support, rather than opting for a quick fix. And above all, it means going to local meetings, hearing the concerns of Canadians, and giving everyday Canadians a hand in crafting policies that respond to those concerns (thus freeing policy-making from its current technocratic status, to a more robust debate about outcomes). Liberal populism must be willing to acknowledge the concerns of both the left and the right, and to present Canadians with a platform that is visionary in its ability to bridge the divides between our dualisms (left/right, urban/rural, east/west, French/English, etc), yet practical in responding to populist concerns. Only by attending to both will Liberals find a common ground upon which Canadian citizenship can be based. It is to this aspiration that Louis St Laurent spoke when, on January 13, 1947 he said:

“No policy can be regarded as wise which divides the people whose effort and resources must put it into effect. This consideration applies not only to the many cultural groups in our country. It applies equally to sectionalism of any kind. We dare not fashion a policy which is based on the particular interests of any economic group, of any class or of any section in this country. The role of this country in world affairs will prosper only as we maintain this principle, for a disunited country will be a powerless one.” – Louis St. Laurent, January 13, 1947

This must be the guiding principle of all Liberal policies. Liberals must recognize that a growing majority of Canadians see the Liberal Party as one of the elites, a party that caters to big business, and doesn’t attend to the needs of workers or the middle-class. If the Liberals want meaningful reform, this charge cannot go unanswered. Liberals must rebuild from the bottom-up — build a grassroots Liberal populism that mobilizes support at election time.

In the months ahead, Liberals will face a choice on who will lead their party, and thus, which direction the Party will take. Liberals, listen carefully. Does that leader represent the top-down of yesterday or the bottom-up of tomorrow? Is he or she willing and able to mobilize a Liberal populism — one that responds to populist concerns and bridges across our internal divisions? For if members chooses a leader that represents the elite, top-down Liberal Party of yesterday, and not the grassroots, bottom-up Liberal Party of tomorrow, then both Stephen Harper and Jack Layton will surely see better days ahead.