I read The Rising Danger of Radical Conservatism in Canada with genuine interest. The anxiety it reflects is real. Political anger is growing, trust is eroding, and too many conversations now begin from a place of suspicion instead of curiosity. That deserves serious attention.But the article makes a mistake that has become increasingly common in Canadian commentary. It treats conservatism itself as the danger, rather than distinguishing between a political philosophy and the behaviours that can distort it.Those are not the same thing.That distinction matters, especially in a week like the one Calgary just experienced. The city hosted a major conservative conference alongside one of the largest influencer events in the country. Two very different gatherings, but both instructive. One brought together politicians, critics, party members, and institutions engaged in thoughtful debate about the future of Canada’s political right. The influencer event highlighted a growing community of citizen journalists, activists, and engaged Canadians, many driven by declining trust in the establishment and a genuine desire to participate in public life.The intersection between those worlds deserves attention. Not because conservatism itself is a problem. Conservatism, at its core, is not radical. It is a cultural, social, and political philosophy rooted in preserving institutions, customs, and values while managing change carefully. In Canada, conservatism has traditionally been pragmatic, incremental, and cautious. It has focused on stewardship, not demolition.That history gets lost when every conservative idea or voter is framed as a threat. It shuts down serious discussion and, more importantly, it ignores why so many Canadians are angry and disengaged in the first place.Housing is unaffordable. Costs are crushing families. Immigration is unmanaged. Public services are strained. People feel talked at, not listened to. When that happens, most do not turn into extremists; they look for voices that acknowledge their reality. If responsible leaders don’t do that, irresponsible ones will.This is where the real danger lies..Yes, there is more populist language in politics today. Yes, some conservative figures flirt with grievance, conspiracy, or “us versus them” narratives because they mobilize quickly. That is not imaginary, and it should be confronted directly. When conservatism abandons restraint, respect for institutions, or pluralism, it stops being conservative at all.But this problem is not confined to one ideology. The same incentive structures reward outrage across the spectrum. Social media can elevate awareness, but it can also elevate certainty, anger, and tribal loyalty. The loudest voices win, and nuance gets buried.Politics is increasingly shaped not by the quality of ideas, but by who can command attention. That should concern anyone who values a healthy democracy, regardless of political stripe.There are real red flags that must be taken seriously: attacks on democratic institutions, intolerance toward minorities, dehumanizing language, and the rejection of basic facts. Those behaviours deserve no accommodation. At the same time, painting broad swaths of Canadians as radicals simply because they support fiscal restraint, public safety, or smaller government is neither accurate nor helpful, and it ultimately undermines the very democratic norms critics claim to defend.What we are facing is not a sudden surge of radical conservatism. It is deepening polarization. Every disagreement becomes a moral indictment. More debates become an emotional attack. That mindset hardens positions and makes compromise impossible.Canada doesn’t need fear-driven commentary imported from elsewhere. It needs seriousness. It needs leaders and commentators willing to challenge bad ideas wherever they appear without turning entire philosophies into parodies.Conservatism, like progressivism, contains thoughtful, responsible approaches and deeply flawed ones. The same is true on the left. The job is not to scream “extremism” at everything we dislike. It’s to do the harder work of sorting ideas honestly and holding behaviour accountable.If we want healthier politics, we need fewer labels and more listening. Less panic and more Canadian realism. Democracy is not defended by hysteria. It is weakened by it, especially when our real problems are rotting in plain sight.Canadians deserve better than that.
