Two remarkable features define the political landscape in Canada: Stephen Harper’s majority government and the NDP opposition. What many don’t realize is that they are connected in ways that will define their limits and opportunities.

Our focus here is the NDP. However, let’s note quickly that a Conservative majority was not considered inevitable when Harper assumed power of a newly unified Conservative party, nor was the party considered to be on the cusp of a stable dynasty. At that point, the Liberals had handed power to a seemingly invulnerable Paul Martin whose three-times majority Liberals were at more than 50 points in the polls. The NDP, in the low teens, appeared ticketed to oblivion. Those who’d have forecast a Harper majority, and an NDP opposition within seven years, would have formed a very small club with credibility on par with the Flat Earth Society.

But while Stephen Harper’s victory was the most important outcome on May 2, it wasn’t the most surprising. It was the NDP’s 100-plus seats led by the ebullient Jack Layton that took everyone’s breath away. In the days after the leader’s death, conventional wisdom suggested his charismatic authority had propelled an ephemeral blip that would inevitably land the party back on earth. To be sure, our polling in December showed that most Canadians expected the NDP to regress.Fast forward almost a year: A caucus of virtual neophytes led by an unknown interim leader and distracted by leadership battle is within range of the Conservatives while enjoying a comfortable lead over the newly hapless Liberals.

Think of it this way: Not once during its first 50 years did the NDP eclipse the Liberals in opinion polls. Yet for almost a year, the NDP have been, on average, 10 points ahead of the erstwhile natural governing party of Canada. Is this merely the inertia of the Jack-o-mania? Such a facile explanation becomes increasingly implausible.

So then what drives this success?

To begin with, the Canadian electorate has become increasingly polarized. The Conservatives formed power from the right of the political spectrum. Historically in Canada, federal governments have secured power by campaigning and occupying the center. It’s a tendency that shows up in Canadian ideological orientations, which have been much less entrenched than those of Americans, for example.

For a considerable amount of time, when asked to choose between “small l” or “small c,” more Canadians selected “neither” rather than “either” label.

During the past several years, there has been a sharp erosion of this pragmatic, eclectic and centrist perspective. The number of those saying “neither” has dropped from half to about a quarter (roughly 40 and 30 per cent respectively pick the “small l” and “small c” labels).

We argue that this polarization fuelled the emergence and success of a right-wing party. We further believe it is the NDP, rather than the Liberals, who play yin to Conservatives’ yang. This hollowing of the ideological middle suggests NDP success is far more than a reflection of Layton’s appeal. (He had, for the record, been around and appealing for some time.)

The economy is the second force behind the rise of the NDP. Economic anxieties now connect the stagnation of economic progress (and fears for an even darker future) to growing resentment of income inequality.

For many stumbling Canadians, fears of the future are heightened by the knowledge that a small cadre of society is doing remarkably well. There may even be a growing tendency to connect economic unfairness with its very stagnation. Many years of severe corporate and personal tax reductions have failed to produce a more productive or prosperous Canada. After nearly 40 years, trickle-down economics has been laid bare as a cruel hoax

The NDP constituency is the reverse image of the Conservative constituency when it comes to values and ideology. This is also the case when it comes to demographics, life cycle and social class. NDP supporters are younger while the Conservatives are older; they are secular not faith-based, they are less likely to be married, more likely to be university – not college – educated. Unlike Conservatives who are often affluent, NDP supporters are often more economically vulnerable.

So what does this mean for the future of the NDP? It means the NDP are a genuine new power that is likely more connected than other parties to emerging trends and economic forces. But it would be a mistake to assume this new ascendancy will result in the next step of forming power. The NDP base is still much more fluid and less emotionally engaged than the Conservative base. Liberal supporters are diminished, but there is still a home for centrism, which is the more natural historical tendency of the Canadian electorate.

Consider the math: Two thirds of Canadians reside in the center and left — fragmented across four political choices. It’s arithmetic that highly favours the Conservatives.

If the NDP wish to depose the CPC and form a government that captures a greater portion of the broader spectrum, then a program of co-operation with the Greens and Liberals may be the safest route. Otherwise, Canada may oscillate between left- then right-wing governments, a pattern that has characterized American and British politics during the past century. While Canadians may be increasingly polarized in response to the rule from the right, there is no evidence (yet) that they’ve shown any desire to make this a permanent state of affairs.