Abstract
Twenty years’ debate have revealed many weaknesses in the Hartz-Horowitz interpretation of conservatism, liberalism, and socialism in Canada, but it continues to be widely taught, for it provides a simple and appealing explanation for some striking differences between Canadian and American politics. This article argues that the interpretation is best understood as a form of neo-Marxism, that its basic weaknesses are most easily seen by examining its treatment of French Canada, and that its explanation for the exceptional strength of socialism in English Canada, linking socialism to toryism, can be strengthened by linking both socialism and toryism to nationalism.

This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit: