Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-s9k8s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-28T09:25:55.535Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Class Voting in the First Alberta Social Credit Election*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2009

Edward Bell
Edward Bell
Affiliation:
University of Calgary
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Many interpretations of the Social Credit movement in Alberta are based on assertions regarding the class basis of its popular support. Since no previous study of Social Credit has offered an empirical account of its popular class base, such an account is provided here. The author analyzes the provincial election of 1935, in which Social Credit first gained power, by comparing party support in the cities, towns and countryside. Within the cities, a district-by-district analysis measures the pattern of class voting in urban areas. Class is found to have been a powerful determinant of voting in this election.

Résumé

Beaucoup d'interprétations du mouvement du Crédit Social en Alberta sont basées sur des assertions qui font du critère de classe le fondement de son soutien populaire. Étant donné qu'on ne retrouve aucune relevé empirique concernant l'appui de la classe populaire au Crédit Social, l'auteur en fait l'objet du présent article. Une analyse de l'élection provinciale de 1935 (où le Crédit Social prend le pouvoir pour la première fois) est faite en comparant le vote pour le parti dans les grandes et petites villes, et à la campagne. Dans le grandes villes, l'analyse se fait par secteurs afin de mieux mesurer le vote de classe en milieu urbain. Les résultats démontrent que le critère de classe a été un facteur déterminant du vote dans cette élection.

Type
Note
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , September 1990 , pp. 519 - 530
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Lipset, S. M., Agrarian Socialism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968), 154.Google Scholar See also Lower, Arthur R. M., Colony to Nation: A History of Canada (Toronto: Longmans, Green, 1946), 518.Google Scholar

2 Government of Canada, Census of Canada 1931, Vol. 7: Occupations and Industries (Ottawa: King's Printer, 1936), 579.Google Scholar

3 Macpherson, C. B., Democracy in Alberta (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1953).Google Scholar

4 Ibid., 6–10, 220–37.

5 Ibid., 21.

6 Ibid., 15–19.

7 For a review of the literature on Social Credit that is sympathetic to Macpherson's position, see Bell, Edward, “The Petite Bourgeoisie and Social Credit: A Reconsideration,” Canadian Journal of Sociology 14 (1989), 54–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 See, for example, Irving, John A., The Social Credit Movement in Alberta (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1959), 244–54Google Scholar, and Finkel, Alvin, The Social Credit Phenomenon in Alberta (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989), 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 Government of Alberta, A Report on Alberta Elections: 1905–1981 (Edmonton: Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, 1983), 13.Google Scholar

10 For a discussion of the limitations of ecological analyses, see Hamilton, Richard F., Who Voted for Hitler? (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982), 500–01Google Scholar, note 6, and Robinson, W. S., “Ecological Correlations and the Behaviour of Individuals,” American Sociological Review 15 (1950), 351–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 Lipset used this technique to determine the class basis of urban support for the Saskatchewan CCF. See Lipset, Agrarian Socialism, Tables 15 and 18, 200, 206. Professional assistance in determining the class composition of the neighbourhoods of the Alberta cities examined here was provided by Brian Owens, Nail Watson, Alex Johnson, Greg Ellis, Donny White and Kathy Dirk,

12 These communities were designated as “cities” for a number of reasons. First, they were the four largest urban communities in Alberta in 1935. Second, this designation is in keeping with Macpherson's usage of the term “city”; see Macpherson, Democracy in Alberta, 10. Also, these cities had economies and political histories quite different from those of the smaller urban communities and agrarian regions. See Bell, “The Petite Bourgeoisie and Social Credit,” 58.

13 When Social Credit came to power, the transferable ballot system of electing candidates was used. The results reported in this study refer to first choices.

14 Government of Canada, Census of Canada 1931, Vol. 2: Population by Areas (Ottawa: King's Printer, 1933), 464–82.Google Scholar

15 The class definitions used in this study are as follows. “Working class” refers to all employees doing manual work. “Petite bourgeoisie,” in keeping with Macpherson, Democracy in Alberta, 225, is the class composed of self-employed people hiring few or no employees apart from family members; it is assumed that members of this class have marginal or unsteady incomes. “Lower-middle class” includes the petite bourgeoisie as defined above, plus lower-paid, non-manual employees (such as clerks or office workers). “Salaried lower-middle class” is used to denote the latter segment of this class. “Upper-middle class” refers to the better paid, non-manual occupations (such as professionals). Finally, “upper class” is defined as the owners of the major non-agricultural means of production, the bourgeoisie.

16 These figures include the votes for R. H. Parkin, who had run as a Labour candidate in 1921, was elected as an Independent Labour member in 1926, ran as an Independent in 1930 and ran as an Independent Labour candidate in 1935.

17 In 1930, Labour also did better in the southeast than in the working-class areas as a whole, taking 35 per cent of the vote in the former region as compared to 30 per cent in the latter.

18 In The Social Credit Movement in Alberta, 78, Irving describes the Ogden Shops themselves as a “strong Social Credit centre.” Hannant, Larry, “The Calgary Working Class and the Social Credit Movement in Alberta, 1932–35,” Labour/Le Travail 16 (1985), 113CrossRefGoogle Scholar, states that Social Credit leader William Aberhart gave a speech at the Ogden Shops.

19 The petite bourgeoisie represented only about 11 per cent of the male work force in the cities. According to the 1951 census, 12 per cent of the male work force in greater Calgary was composed of “employers and own accounts” and “no pays”; the figure for Edmonton for that year was also 12 per cent (Census of Canada, Bulletin: CT-10, 5–3–1953, 12, 14). These figures slightly overestimate the presence of the petite bourgeoisie, however, since “employers and own accounts” includes owners of large firms. One of the 12 per cent in these categories was deducted to account for this. Such data are not available for years before 1951, and are not available for Lethbridge, Medicine Hat or smaller communities.

20 Business organizations like the Calgary Board of Trade and the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce, as well as similar organizations in smaller urban centres, were openly hostile to Social Credit. Whether their pronouncements were representative of the views of small business proprietors is not known.

21 Voter turnout in the constituency was 58 per cent in 1930, 80 per cent in 1935; constituency data include some areas beyond the city limits. Participation rates for the cities proper or by class areas are not available.

22 Hamilton, Richard F., Class and Politics in the United States (Toronto: Wiley, 1972), 293.Google Scholar

23 The results for the cities reported here may be compared with the findings of Grayson and Grayson, who observed a strong association between support for Social Credit and the level of unemployment in urban areas. See Grayson, J. Paul and Grayson, L. M., “The Social Base of Interwar Political Unrest in Urban Alberta,” this Journal 7 (1974), 289–313.Google Scholar

24 See Bell, “The Petite Bourgeoisie and Social Credit,” 54–56.

25 This definition of “small town” is equivalent to C. B. Macpherson's term “town.” See Macpherson, Democracy in Alberta, 10.

26 This north/south split may partially explain the relatively low Social Credit vote in Edmonton, which is located in the north.

27 Northern rural areas voted 53 per cent Social Credit (N = 115,007) and the 10 northern small towns, 43 per cent (N = 7,952).

28 For a different explanation of this issue, see Finkel, Alvin, “Populism and the Proletariat: Social Credit and the Alberta Working Class,” Studies in Political Economy, No. 13 (Spring 1986), 109–35.Google Scholar