Preston Manning is mired in the past regarding the nature and strength of populist movements.

The populist upsurges in Canada in the first half of the 20th century to which he refers were top-down efforts guided by local elites (albeit clergy and farm and labour leaders, academics, etc.) who tapped into local discontents with the status quo imposed outside of their region or guided by social elites.

These local elites kept their movements from becoming too disruptive or radical and otherwise kept them within the bounds of local social conventions.

Where, such as in the case of the KKK in BC and on the Prairies during the 19th century, such 'respectable' local leadership was absent or ineffective, the populist movement in question soon collapsed.

Preston Manning had some early success with a tarted-up version of such locally led populism through the Reform Party but he and that Party soon failed.  Can we really believe that what worked in the 1920s and 30s will work now?