Birds of a Feather: Marois and Harper

I know it's a bit of a stretch to suggest that Pauline Marois is Stephen Harper in drag.

For one thing, Marois is a she, which is not an insignificant detail. And she's 10 years older than Harper; and they lurk at opposite ends of the Left-Right spectrum (if indeed those terms apply these days, if it's not just a matter of who get de power). Even so, a cursory look at their resumés suggests that they are birds of a feather in more ways than one.

Here we have two career politicians, neither of whom is known for eloquence or charisma, both of whom hold undistinguished degrees from undistinguished universities. (Harper has an MA from the University of Calgary; Marois a BA from Laval and an MA from U de Montreal.)

Following graduation, after the briefest of dalliances with the rigours of the private sector (Harper clerked at the bottom tier of Imperial Oil; Marois "gained experience" with "community organizations"), both proceeded directly into politics, where they remain to this day.

Mentored by Svengalis

There's more. At an early stage in their, ahem, intellectual development, both acquired economist mentors who were older, smarter, better-educated, anti-Canadian and a bit sinister in their tactics: Tom Flanagan is an American with a PhD from Duke, the Svengali behind the Wild Rose Party who would turn his adopted country into a replica of the one he left; Jacques Parizeau is a separatist educated at the London School of Economics, whose favourite expression is "By Jove" and who once proclaimed that, by fudging the referendum question, he would lure Quebecers into separation "like lobsters in a pot."

It almost goes without saying that neither Harper nor Marois has shown the least interest in world travel, literature or philosophy. (Harper likes hockey and the Beatles; Marois' off-time enthusiasm is for expensive real estate.)

Mediocrity ascendant

Now look at their careers: Both began political life as back-room operators; both ran campaigns based on a sort of nostalgic conservatism that would turn back the clock to Victorian times -- an era when Canada was a colony of resource barons, and Quebec was a monochromatic "nation" based on pure laine ethnicity.

Disconcertingly, both were chosen to lead their parties pretty much as a last resort. Marois' first run for the leadership was stymied by a handsome university dropout named André Boisclair, who proceeded to drive the party into a telephone pole. Harper's ascent to the throne of the Conservatives came only after the Canadian Alliance plowed under, thanks to another handsome university dropout named Stockwell Day.

But to my mind at least, their most salient shared characteristic -- one they share with a depressing number of Canadian pols these days -- is the overall mediocrity of their minds, as revealed in their resumés.

I know this sounds like the reminiscence of an old fart but, for the first election I ever voted in, the leaders of the two main parties were Pierre Trudeau (Harvard, Institute d'Études Politiques de Paris, London School of Economics), and Robert Stanfield (Dalhousie, Harvard law degree top of his class). Trudeau won, succeeding Lester Pearson, who had won the Nobel Prize.

I know this shouldn't really bother me, living in a province with a handsome university dropout premier whose experience runs to motherhood, politics, radio hosting and, er, that's it really.