This article deals with the political development in Czechoslovakia 1945–1948, a crucial period in Eastern Europe for a liberal democratic system in that country. In 1945 the Soviet leader, Stalin, gave his personal approval for this experiment to go on and the Czechoslovak communist party followed his instruction, participating fully in the government. As in international affairs Czechoslovakia was to act as a bridge between the West and East; internally it was to serve as a model of peaceful transition from “bourgeois” democracy to “people's” democracy. The model is examined in some detail. Since attempts were made in 1968 to re-establish it in the new conditions of the 1960s, it was accepted as a political model for the Euro-communists. After 1947, with the onset of the cold war the Czechoslovak communists changed their minds (Stalin probably also) and began to plot to seize power, which they easily achieved in February 1948. The article is based on published communist sources, especially those during the period of the Prague spring, and diplomatic reports from Czechoslovakia deposited at the British Foreign Office.

There is a disturbing quality to George Grant's more recent work that reflects less the substance than the obscurity of his so-called prophetic message. Gloomy reflections on the human prospect are, after all, not uncommon today, and while critics may describe yet another dismal forecast as pessimistic, they are unlikely to be “perplexed” by it or be struck by its “cranky obscurity.” The problem with books such as Time as History or English-Speaking Justice is not that their message is unpalatable but that one is never really sure just what the message is. Certainly Grant's work resists any simple ideological packaging. He has consistently repudiated the Utopian politics of the left and is well aware of the impossibility of conservatism in the modern world. Neither can it be said that in his writing Grant simply adopts the role of social critic. While apparently critical of modern society he is well aware that we are all moderns today, reminding us of the foolishness of attempting a return to the past as if the discoveries of the modern age had not been made.

Given the Liberal party's dominant position in Canadian federal politics, it has been extremely difficult for the Progressive Conservatives to effect an electoral breakthrough and win enough parliamentary seats to form a government. In this century, the Conservatives have been in power for only 22 years. The last time the party formed a majority government was in the spectacular Diefenbaker victory of 1958 which gave the Conservatives 208 of 265 seats. After the demise of the Diefenbaker government in 1963, the Conservatives languished in opposition until 1979 when they won a plurality of seats and Joe Clark formed his short-lived government. It is the election of 1979 which provides the focus of analysis in this article, and especially the success of the Conservatives in supplanting the Liberals, although not with a majority government.

Recent years have witnessed an increased attention toward legislative decision-making in urban Canada. Various studies have been undertaken which attempt to analyze the fundamental patterns of city council voting in different Canadian centres. Although influenced theoretically by discussions in the American legislative voting literature, they have frequently detected trends at variance with findings in the United States. Nevertheless, the direction of such Canadian studies has tended to be less focussed, with hypotheses and theoretical approaches frequently being rejected. This particular work was undertaken in an attempt to break out of a predictable mould which has tended to feature replications of similar research modes across the range of cities. The goal here is to redress the lack of theoretical initiative and to develop new explanations for the dynamic that underlies the municipal decision-making process.

The Quee's influence in Canada is waning, as nearly everyone agrees. Yet a majority of Canadians must regret this decline, because opinion polls have shown that for every one Canadian who wants to abolish the monarchy, two want to preserve it. Canadians, it would appear, have resigned themselves to accepting their countr's gradual transformation into a republic, as though it were part of some larger inevitable process.

Many of them, for example, continue to support electorally a political party that, since the days of William Lyon Mackenzie King, has had a policy of dissociating Canada from her British imperial past. In 1972, a special joint parliamentary committee formed by the Trudeau government to study the constitution declared that it “preferred a Canadian as Head of State for Canada.”