The walls of political empires such as the one that rules Alberta crumble only when the broad consensus that holds them together cracks apart. On Oct. 17, the Wildrose Alliance, a 2008 coalition of the Wildrose and the Alberta Alliance parties, will select either Danielle Smith or Mark Dyrholm as its leader. That and the outcome of the Progressive Conservatives' leadership review of Premier Ed Stelmach will determine the answer to the rarely asked question of whether Alberta's and Canada's longest-lasting political empire might just have finally passed its best-before date. The Wildrose Alliance is the provincial equivalent of the late-1980s Reform Party. Then, Blue Tories frustrated by what they believed to be the federal Conservative government's failure to adhere to fiscal conservatism walked away from prime minister Brian Mulroney's centre-right coalition and, along with social conservatives, built the wave that Reform rode for 10 years. The only foreshadowing of that unrest came in the 1989 by-election victory of Deborah Grey, Reform's first MP. Fast-forward 20 years to Alberta and the victory in last month's Calgary-Glenmore by-election of the Wildrose Alliance's Paul Hinman in a riding that had been deep Tory Blue for 38 years. High-profile Calgary Alderman Diane Colley-Urquhart was the PC's standard bearer and an assumed shoo-in for the cabinet; she finished a shocking third behind Mr. Hinman and Liberal Avalon Roberts. Wildrose's victory was all the more stunning because it took place in urban Calgary, where many commentators have insisted, albeit without much evidence of changed voting patterns to support the claim, that the influx of people from other parts of Canada is blunting the city's renowned conservative leanings. The result is that political attention is suddenly focused squarely on the struggle between Ms. Smith and Mr. Dyrholm to lead Wildrose and then build a sustainable reformist wave to ride into the next election. Both candidates have well-funded platforms designed to appeal to both fiscal and social conservatives. Ms. Smith, an articulate former journalist, broadcaster and director of provincial affairs with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, is billed as the candidate most likely to appeal to supporters with a strong bent toward free-market business policies. However, her laissez-faire approach toward social policies includes accommodation for the socially conservative. Mr. Dyrholm, a chiropractor, appeals primarily to the social conservative crowd although he, too, promotes free-market, small-government fiscal principles and, just in case there was any doubt about political parallels, has "Reforming Alberta" as his campaign slogan. The ability of the victor to hold the party's fiscon-socon consensus/coalition together and then broaden its appeal is the key first step if a real revolution in Alberta politics is to take place. Meanwhile, Mr. Stelmach faces a mandatory leadership review next month similar to the one that proved to be the undoing of former premier Ralph Klein. Notwithstanding his powerful 2008 election victory, the Premier is burdened by the same "everybody's second choice" leadership dynamic that so troubled Stephane Dion of the federal Liberals. Struggling to stifle unrest within his caucus as an $8-billion provincial surplus morphed into a $7-billion deficit in a matter of months, Mr. Stelmach evicted a former cabinet minister, the popular Guy Boutilier of Fort McMurray, from the caucus, punished a rookie Calgary MLA for mildly critical comments and was forced last week to respond to rumours that Mr. Boutilier and as many as 10 Tory MLAs are poised to defect to Wildrose. Mr. Klein, to the chagrin of Stelmach loyalists, weighed in on the leadership issue by opining that the Premier needs a minimum of 70-per-cent support to maintain order. The common wisdom is that should Ms. Smith, the candidate seen as the most likely to expand Wildrose's appeal into the centre-right, become leader and should Mr. Stelmach survive the leadership review, the pan-Alberta consensus that the party of Peter Lougheed has so carefully nurtured for 38 years may unravel. Deepening fissures are already evident between Red and Blue, urban and rural, public and private sectors, fiscal conservatives and Keynesians and, most openly, Edmonton and Calgary. For Mr. Stelmach, burdened by a weak internal mandate and the reputation that under his watch Alberta's oil-and-gas regime is all of a sudden the country's least friendly to investment, that's a lot of consensus to hold together. For the challenger, whether it is Ms. Smith or Mr. Dyrholm, it's a lot of consensus to build.

Senior Fellow Jonathan Chaplin, Director of KLICE, publishes God and Government with Nick Spencer of Theos. Featuring a top collection of essays including Bishop N.T. Wright and a Foreword by Archbishop Rowan Williams, Cardus calls this "must reading" for folks thinking about religion and politics.  

"A Canadian Culture of Generosity: Renewing Canada's Social Architecture by Investing in the Civic Core and the Third Sector", is a Cardus discussion paper looking at a strategic response to flagging volunteerism, philanthropy and civic participation. Order a copy here.  

Mike Goheen and Erin Glanville (eds) release The Gospel and Globalization, featuring chapters by Senior Fellows Jonathan Chaplin, Paul Williams and Cardus Researcher Robert Joustra. More on the book...   

Cardus opened its new head office in Hamilton, on 185 Young Street with ceremony and style on September 2. Visit us at our new Hamilton location in the coming weeks, and stop in for a coffee and a chat. Or - check out some the photo gallery from our event on Facebook - no account required!    Finally, coming soon browse some candid video from the night and get a feel for the new space, what it is we're up to and the folks that make it happen.

The passage of time and the progress of cultural development continue to make positive changes in society, but surely Canadians are saddened by the process that has put the existence of Alberta's Hutterite colonies at risk. To those who don't know, the Alberta government recently won a Supreme Court of Canada decision upholding its right to insist that in order to have a valid driver's licence, the holders thereof must have their photograph attached to it. On the face of it, this is not unreasonable: People need to be identified, and driving is a privilege and not a right. Or, as Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote in support of the majority in the 4-3 decision, "the negative impact on the freedom of religion of colony members who wish to obtain licences does not outweigh the benefits associated with the universal photo requirement." The problem is that the photo requirement offends a Hutterian tenet of faith that for some forbids having their photograph willingly taken. The act is interpreted as the creation of a 'graven image,' which violates the Bible's Second Commandment forbidding idolatry. Relevant to this and the end of their exempt status is that on a great many of the colonies within Alberta, Hutterites allow photography, provided that it is candid. The act of photography itself does not violate their piety; it is the act of posing that some consider sinful. Other people, obviously most of us, hold different views. Until now, Alberta Hutterites, a passive, communal people, have been free to hold licences without having to have their photo taken. Now, some colonies are faced with the decision to either abandon driving or to sell the land they have so faithfully stewarded these past hundred or more years and move to a place where their faith can comfortably co-exist with secular society, essentially the same broad issue that caused their forefathers to flee Russia for North America in the late 19th century. Alberta told the Supreme Court that the primary reasons for the regulation are the enhancement of security, additional efficiency for the police and possible future harmonization of licensing. But surely the main objective is to ensure that people are properly identified and not whether or not they have their pictures taken. After all, people can, through perfectly routine practices such as changes in hairstyle, growth or removal of facial hair and weight gain and loss, appear considerably different in a photo than they do in reality. So why not simply give the Hutterites (and others with a similarly proven conscientious objection) the option of identifying themselves on their licences through other means? A thumbprint, for instance, provides more accurate identification than a photograph. Police have the technological capacity to access licences on file and they have the technology to test them for matches. Even if the process of identification in such instances takes extra time, the added inconvenience to the Hutterites (really, how many times have you seen flashing lights in hot pursuit of Hutterites on the lam?) seems a reasonable compromise. Indeed, as Madam Justice Rosalie Abella wrote in dissent, fewer than 250 drivers were exempted, the previous system operated without incident for 29 years and there is no harmonized licensing system in place. "The government has not discharged its evidentiary burden or demonstrated that the salutary effects in these circumstances are anything more than a web of speculation." She goes on to say: "To suggest, as the majority does, that the deleterious effects are minor because the colony members could simply arrange for third-party transportation fails to appreciate the significance of their self-sufficiency to the autonomous integrity of their religious community. When significant sacrifices have to be made to practise one's religion in the face of a state-imposed burden, the choice to practise one's religion is no longer uncoerced. Canada has a long tradition of welcoming people of different backgrounds and encouraging them to feel free to maintain their traditions. Excellent farmers and kind, peaceful people, the Hutterites are a rich part of Alberta. Yes, there are boundaries to cultural practices that may be accepted elsewhere but are unacceptable here. But if there has been one positive identifier in Canada's culture, it is that we are a reasonable people who respect each other's beliefs. Reasonable people should be able to accommodate the rich Hutterite tradition of peacefully farming Alberta's rich soil.

Melinda Estabrooks Interviews CEO of AIC and Cardus Senior Fellow Jonathan Wellum on Listen Up TV.

Thirty years and a month ago I began my career in journalism as a summer intern at the Cowichan News in Duncan, B.C. For now, it ends. Yes, my appointment last month as Alberta and Northwest Territories CRTC commissioner has a lot to do with it. But the truth is that I really don't have anything left to say in this genre. I have had most of the arguments, very publicly. I've won a few and I've lost most of those that really mattered to me, at least for now. I have had the opportunity to cover some amazing events, such as during my tenure in sports at the Calgary Sun, the World Cup in Mexico in 1986, (I will never forget Luis Fernandez of France, following 90 minutes of play at 7,000 ft. in 40oC temperatures, meeting with the media while sipping a glass of wine and lighting a smoke), the Olympic Winter Games in 1988 and Stanley Cup finals in 1986 and 1989. In my news life I saw the Klein Revolution first hand at the legislature in the days when Jim Dinning would rise in question period and respond to the latest plea for funding by saying, "Mr. Speaker, No" and then sit back down. I saw the rise of the Bloc and Reform and sat, fascinated, in the Parliamentary Press Gallery in Ottawa while the results of the 1995 referendum of Quebec sovereignty rolled in. I won a National Newspaper Award and was honoured by the Association of Opinion Page Editors for my skills as an essayist. Over the years at the Calgary Herald as editorial page editor, editor in chief and publisher I met prime ministers, presidents, premiers, royalty, philosophers, playwrights, theologians, authors, state and territorial leaders from across North America and beyond. On Sept. 11, 2001 we published the first Extra Edition of the Calgary Herald since Wandering Spirit, angered by broken promises and the loss of the buffalo, engineered the Northwest Rebellion's Frog Lake Massacre in 1885. I worked for and with some larger-than-life characters, revered and vanquished, such as Conrad Black and Izzy Asper. I have made many friends and learned that not everyone who is friendly is a friend. I have seen power and I have felt it. It was wonderful. It was everything, and much, much more, that I dreamed of when I embarked on the adventure 30 years ago banging out stories on a typewriter in that little building on Vancouver Island. But I have also learned that there is a rich, full life beyond the narrow spectrum of that world. My wife and I have raised two of the finest, most beautiful young people you can imagine. We have volunteered for charities, sports and the arts; this city has been good to us and over the past 26 years here we have tried to be more than mere Buffalo Hunters who only take from this land and leave nothing to sustain it. I have learned that the world changes not through media's obsession with 'events' but through the incremental impact of ideas and the vast mysteries of faith or the lack thereof. I am still trying to change and articulate the world and its meaning while understanding that in these matters reasonable people of good faith may always disagree. I am not a great writer, but I am pretty good at it. Two years ago, as a senior fellow with the Cardus think-tank, I was invited to spend a week in the New Mexico desert with artists, poets and authors contemplating Islam, Judaism and Christianity through the prism of art. It reminded me of the dreams of a long-haired and bearded young man ill-prepared for the world's realities, petrified by his own potential for failure and uncertain of his considerable capacity for success. That is the world where my writing now belongs; where it is called to go. It is the world beyond cops, courts, commerce and politics where writing touches people's hearts and tweaks their souls. It is about beauty and a refuge from the otherwise concise life of a regulator charged with overseeing the nation's ability to reflect its culture. It is there. But it is not here. And so it is time to go.

This was the intellectual epicentre of events that has led to 89-year-old John Demjanjuk being charged as an accessory to 27,900 of the murders committed at the Sobibor death camp more than 65 years ago. The native of Ukraine who spent most of his life as a U. S. autoworker will likely be tried in a society that remains in the process of confessing and asking forgiveness for that horrific period of its life. The images of those horrors linger openly in Berlin's Topography of Terror where visitors view graphic photos of executions that took place before nonchalant crowds of onlookers--some with unexplainable smirks on their faces. It is testament to carefully planned and meticulously choreographed evil. There is something profound about being on the sites where these things happened and seeing where the bullets of Hitler's Third Reich still mark the stones. The Holocaust Memorial overwhelms the senses. The stones, by design, seem to go on forever and give meaning to the enormity of the Holocaust's body count of six million. Here, over the course of a single generation, a culture went mad and unleashed the largest, most costly war in human history. Here, one culture proudly and efficiently tried to eradicate another. Here, we see the consequences of ideas. It is neither the only nor the most recent place where one culture, race or tribe has launched a genocidal attack against another. Germany's lessons were forgotten in Bosnia and have been repeated elsewhere, most notably Rwanda. As a Christian I have a theological category to assist me in understanding what happened here. But I remain challenged. The depth of the depravity among the masses that participated in it is inescapable. For this was not--and could not have been--the outcome of a conspiracy of a few. What happened here revealed, and continues to illustrate, the depths to which the human project can sink. Rationally, we can separate ourselves from Hitler and his henchmen. But no one can reasonably believe that the bulk of the people involved were made of anything different than the rest of us. Or, as the late political philosopher Hannah Arendt put it: "The trouble with (Adolph) Eichmann (architect of the "final solution") was precisely that so many were like him, and that the many were neither perverted nor sadistic, that they were, and still are, terribly and terrifyingly normal. From the viewpoint of our legal institutions and of our moral standards of judgment, this normality was much more terrifying than all the atrocities put together." Redemption is a huge topic, with lots attached to it. A brief visit to this city does not give one the right to judge it. The apparent absence of enthusiastic places of worship is troubling, but on a macro level Germans lead the world in their honesty in confronting their past by telling their stories to others and, in the process, constantly reminding themselves. The Demjanjuk trial may be necessary for justice; it is not required as a reminder. The stones and memorials here confess a communal sin and seek forgiveness. Because if a city can, to use the sort of evangelical terminology that makes so many uncomfortable, be "born again," this is it. Seven Jewish synagogues are now active here. The boulevards and cafes seem vibrant and there is an excitement connected with Berlin's determination to move on and rather than being known as the epicentre of evil be a model instead for the lesson that Hitler denied--our humanity is not based on racial heritage. That, at least, is the Christian point of view: that all people are created in the image of God and all are equal. That also means that the same capacity for evil that was revealed here in Berlin lives inside of each of us. This is the truth, brilliantly articulated by Fyodor Dostoevsky in The Brothers Karamazov, that in the "freedom" humans seek, we are capable of things of which we would prefer not to speak. But Berlin, as the rest of the world, still exists. The unspeakable has been overcome, and the only seemingly rational explanation comes not from within, but without. To find hope in such a place, one must look beyond the monuments and place this story in the context of a larger one. History has a purpose, a truth which seems spoken very loudly amid the haunting silence of the monuments of Berlin.