Some Observations on the Revival of Canadian Political Thought

Some Observations on the Revival ofCanadian Political Thought Not so long ago a special issueofa major Canadianjournal dedicated to Canadian political thought would have been a contradiction in terms. Canadians, as historians and political scientists are wont to tell us, are a practical people, their political life and institutions devoid oftheoretical content.1 Iftrue, then Canadians have had considerable company. In the late 1950s the eminent American political scientist Robert Dahl could write, without fear ofcontradiction, that "in the Englishspeaking world where so many ofthe interesting political problems have been solved ... political theory is dead."2 Today, however, political theory has become a real presence in Canadian academe. Thearticles in this issueare testimony to this fact. No longercan oneclaim, unchallenged, that Canadian political life and institutions are without normative underpinnings. In recent years a plethora ofbooks and articles, some by historians but most by political scientists, have been written exploring various theoretical dimensions ofCanadian politics.3 Why is this the case? Why, until recently, have Canadian political ideas been so neglected as an objectofstudy? Theanswers to thesequestions are complex. One explanation, as far as Canadian political scientists are concerned, stems from the historical underdevelopment notonly ofpolitical theory butofpolitical science within Canadian universities. In 1950, for example, there were only thirty political scientists in Canadian universities. In the 1960s and 1970s the numbers mushroomed, rising to approximately 750 by 1973.4 However, even with the growth ofnumbers political theory was poorly represented as a sub-field. In the early 1970sonly eight percent ofCanadian political scientists identified themselves as political theorists.5 With political science and political theory so marginalized within Canadian universities one could hardly expect to see Canadian political theory leaving much ofan intellectual imprint. There is, as Alan Cairns has suggested, a clear correlation between size, resources and disciplinary capacity.6 Today, ifpublications areany indication, the numberofCanadianpolitical scientists and historians working within thefield ofCanadian political theory has substantially increased. Thequestion here is, what has stimulated the revival ofinterest in Canadian political thought? After all, both political science and history have many other sub-fields. What has attracted scholars to Canadian political theory in particular? The answer to this question requires a briefexposition oftheclose relationship that exists between society and discipline. In the 1950s it did appear to some that political theory was deadand thegreat issues oftheday resolved. The 1950sand early 1960s was a period ofeconomic prosperity and political consensus. In universities, behaviouralism, with its assertion that social sciencehad to be value-free, was making real inroads into Canadian political science. By the late 1960sand early 1970s there wasa growing recognitionin all Western Journal ofCanadian Studies Vol. 26, No. 2 (Elf 1991 Summer) 3 industrial countries that thegreat issuesoftheday werenotsolved. Steady economic growth and prosperity could no longer be assumed and the political consensus governingWestern nations was underattack. Ifit is true, as George Sabine, Sheldon Wolin andothers claim, thatthere is a correlationbetweensocietal problems, conflict and the production ofpolitical theory then it is hardly surprising that Canada, like theUnited States andothercountries, with its own abundanceofpolitical problems and conflict, should have stimulated a growing interest in political theory.7 For more than thirty years Canada has been beset by a growing list ofserious social and political problems. The increasingeconomicand cultural dominationof Canada by the United States, for example, led one ofCanada's foremost thinkers, George Grant, to sound an alarm. Grant's Lamentfor a Nation and other works encouraged a generation of young scholars to apply political theory to Canadian political issuesand its political life, past and present, as H.D. Forbes demonstrates in this issue. The continuing debate over English-Canadian political identity, the seemingly endlessconstitutional crisis, thesignificanceofthe CharterofRights and Freedoms, and the increasingdesire for Canadians to participatemore fully inpolitics have led to a serious re-examination ofthe role political theory can play in illuminating the normative and intellectual foundations ofCanadian political culture and institutions. The emergence ofCanadian political theory has been assisted by two factors: theabandonment ofthe proposition that political sciencecan ever be value-free and the proliferationofalternativemethods ofunderstandingthe role ofpolitical ideas. In addressing the prospects ofa value-freepolitical science, Terence Ball has written that"theolderpositivistdistinctionbetween empirical and normativepoliticaltheory is impossibleto sustainand ... a rapprochementbetweenpolitical scienceand political philosophy·is not only...