Canada: The Death of a Nation

 

It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time 

Is Canada finished? I see this claim frequently now online. I want to be optimistic, but I fear that may be right. 

We cannot be complacent. Nations can go backwards. Bad government can wreck a nation. In 1979, Iran might have had limited freedoms, but it seemed to be on a path to more, and was on a par economically with Spain. It has become poorer and less free. Venezuela under Chavez managed to descend into poverty to the point of starvation despite sitting on an ocean of oil. Once-prosperous Rhodesia fell apart as Zimbabwe under Mugabe. South Africa is falling apart now, from the First World to the Third. Until the 1930s, Argentina was one of the world’s top ten economies. Cuba was prosperous before 1960.

It can happen; it does happen. It can happen to Canada. I think it is happening.

Canada has since 2015 had a disastrously bad government. And there is no sign of it ending soon. Carney is about to gain a majority in parliament, through defections and byelections, allowing him to do as he wishes for the next four years. Worse, even were a vote held today, polls show he would win a majority government. Canada’s last chance may have been the election of Spring 2025—and we blew it.

Democracy is supposed to be the check against bad government. But it does not always work, and is not working here. Hitler was democratically elected in Germany. Chavez was democratically elected in Venezuela. Peron was the people’s choice in Argentina. The average voter is not that smart; their prejudices can be appealed to. They can be gulled. And then they wake up only when it is too late, and future elections have been cancelled.

Carney’s policies continue Trudeau’s policies, and they are disastrous. Canada’s prosperity depends on trade with the US. Carney has not made a trade deal with the US. It seems that he does not want to. His policy seems to be to deliberately antagonize the US: “elbows up.” Castro’s policy. One is reminded of Johnson’s adage that patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.

His government, with its hostility to oil and gas, has hobbled Canada’s chief potential source of wealth. This has of course alienated Alberta and Saskatchewan, where this industry dominates. And now it seems increasingly likely that Alberta will vote to separate from Canada. If it does, Canada will have lost its cash cow, and its bargaining power in making any future trade deals. The rest of Canada will be further impoverished. Other provinces may be driven to separate.

The various Canadian governments’ and courts’ growing concept of “aboriginal rights” is also on a trajectory to destroy the economy, by throwing property rights into doubt, by preventing resource development without big payoffs to this vested interest, and by shovelling increasing amounts of money into an unproductive black hole. It is like a vampire on the national neck.

The growth of government bureaucracy in general since Trudeau took power is unsustainable. A large government is parasitical on the economy. Ibn Khaldun analyzed this clearly back in the 14th century. This is how nations and civilizations always fall.

Based purely on the value of Canada’s resources alone, every Canadian is worth about one million dollars. It is a measure of how bad and parasitic our government is that we are instead worth a fraction of that individually and facing a declining standard of living.

The Canadian Liberal governments have also pursued the suicidal twin policies of multiculturalism and mass immigration more energetically than the governments of Europe. Europe is now waking up to the fact that this was a mistake, for the sake of civil order, cultural identity, quality of life, and even economically. French or British commentators are saying it may be too late now to save themselves. If so, Canada is further down that road to doom.

The gurus of the technical world are predicting that most jobs will be obsolete within a few years. If they are right, aside from the problems of strained housing supply and medical services and the like, and aside from the disintegration of social cohesion, aside from the rising rates of crime and deterioration of quality of life as Canada goes from a high-trust to a low-trust society, aside from the harm done to a distinct Canadian culture, each new immigrant must soon become a ward of the state, a net cost to everyone already here. 

At the same time that it has been doing its best to destroy the economy, the Canadian governments have been growing more authoritarian, less respectful of human rights and the citizenry. The most disturbing example is the invocation of the Emergency Act against the Freedom Convoy, freezing the assets of citizens who expressed opposition to the government. This was done in violation of the Canadian Constitution, the relevant legislation, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. But here’s the clincher—there is no mechanism to punish those in charge. Canadian governments are simply on their honour in this regard. And they lack honour. We have now the established precedent that Canadian governments can do this whenever they like.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a dead letter in any case. It is supposed to guarantee freedom of expression, for example. Yet this is ignored by the legislatures and the courts, to the extend that it has even become the conventional wisdom that Canada does not, like the US, have a constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech. We do; it is just that,  like the old constitution of the Soviet Union, or that of Communist China, the Canadian charter exists only for show.

The government had introduced bill after bill imposing censorship, most recently Bill C-9, which makes citizens subject to two years in prison even for quoting in good faith a passage from the Bible to which the government objects. The media is effectively owned by the government, either formally or through massive subsidy, ensuring there is no free discussion of issues or ideas. Domestic news is otherwise effectively blocked online for those lacking a VPN—as it is in China, or in Saudi Arabia.

Never might the lack of freedom of speech; or freedom of religion; or freedom of association; or freedom of assembly; all of which are now effectively gone in Canada. The right to life, the most fundamental right, is also denied: through government-funded unrestricted abortion on demand, and through a slippery slope to encouraging and assisting suicide for the depressed, disabled, ill, or poor. This is, literally, how Hitler started; it ended in the Holocaust.

The Canadian courts, like the legislatures, ignore the Charter of Rights and instead impose their will. They systematically discriminate on the basis of race, sex, and ethnicity. This assertion is not based only on statistical evidence: they make this open and explicit in their “Gladue rules.” The government discriminates in every conceivable way, in favour of preferred groups and against the fundamental principle of human equality and equal protection under the law. There is special funding or special hiring rules for black groups, for aboriginal groups, for women, for recent immigrants, for gays, and so forth.

On top of this, and on top of alienating the US, Canadian foreign policy seems to have become a disaster. Once on good terms with almost everybody, recent Canadian governments have picked unnecessary fights. Communist China seems to have infiltrated the Canadian government. Their success is indicated by the fact that the Carney government is doing whatever it can to block investigation of the matter. They are owned. And government policies now seem to favour China’s interests over the interests of Canadians. 

At this point, I think our only hope may be invasion from the US. Perhaps once Trump is done with Iran and Cuba, Canada will be next on his list. 

It would be better than the alternative we seem to face.

Why Canada Can't Get a Trade Deal with the US

The US government has just released a new list of trade irritants preventing a new trade deal with Canada. It reveals the crucial point that the US is negotiating in the best interests of Canadians, and the Canadian government is our worst enemy.

As summarized by ChatGPT, Canada’s system of “supply management” is the prime irritant. It artificially jacks up the price of essential staples like dairy and eggs, for the benefit of a few thousand agribusinesses. Here especially Canadians should be cheering for the US government. Supply management sacrifices the interests of ordinary Canadians for corporate benefit. Trump wants to help us with affordable food.

Next in the ChatGPT list is “Canada’s Online News Act,” that “requires large platforms to pay Canadian media.” This is in practice a censorship bill, limiting Canadians’ access to news and information about Canada, again for the benefit of a few favoured businesses. This is just about the opposite of what a responsible government should be doing. Canadians should be cheering for the US government.

Third on the list is “government procurement policies favouring Canadian suppliers.” The fix is simple. Canada has in the past protested US “buy American” policies. It is only fair that this work both ways. If both countries go instead to “buy North American,” it is a net benefit to Canada: the US has the larger market. And it means cheaper government procurement, a cost savings for taxpayers. Once again, the US government is negotiating in the Canadian national interest, and the Canadian government is working against us as Canadians, for the sake of handouts to a wealthy elite.

Fourth on the list is Canadian cultural and media protections: “Canada’s support for domestic cultural industries (broadcasting, publishing, etc.)” Presumably a big chunk of that is Canadian government subsidies and direct funding to the CBC and news media. These subsidies are again against the Canadian national interest: they tend to restrict public discourse, turning news media into government propaganda outlets. 

One can argue for supporting a distinct Canadian culture, for government support to poetry, dance, the visual arts, and the like. But I doubt this is the US objection, since US governments do this too. Moreover, at present, government funding for the arts in Canada is actually doing the opposite, with systemic preference for artistic expressions that are NOT distinctly Canadian, under the banner of “multiculturalism.” Such expenditures are directly counter to the Canadian national interest. Again, patriotic Canadians who want the best for Canada must cheer for the American negotiators.

Next in line are “Laws requiring French-language labelling and branding adjustments.” One can sympathize with the desire of French-Canadians to preserve their language. However, there is no question that this is a serious barrier to enterprises wanting to sell consumer products into Canada—and not just US enterprises. Even Canadian enterprises. Everything must be specially repackaged for Canada, a relatively small market. This limits choices and boosts prices for the Canadian consumer. Is the game really worth the candle? Can’t this be left to the free market, and Francophones and sympathizers left to vote with their wallet?

Next is agricultural and food regulations. I do not think there would be any serious risk to the health of Canadians by simply entering into full compliance with US food regulations—something the members of the EU have done among themselves. It is not as though the US is some corrupt Third-World country without effective government supervision. It is not as if the US government is likely to play fast and loose with the health of their own citizens. If this is really a sticking point for Canadian negotiators, one almost has to assume they are using these regulations as a covert barrier to trade, as the Americans claim—once again to reward business cronies qt the cost of average Canadians.

Now we come to the enforcement of intellectual property rights. “Rules affecting digital content and streaming.” Here I think the Canadian system is better. The American regime gives more rights to the producer, and fewer to the consumer. However, the US side apparently cites this as a minor irritant—and mostly a matter of enforcement. Whatever... 

Next, the US cites regulatory complexity, especially with regard to resource industries. Again, the Americans are arguing for the best interests of Canadians. Simplifying and streamlining regulatory processes would be a big boost to our economy and our prosperity. Given Canada’s resource wealth, every single Canadian actually should, on paper, be a millionaire. That we are so far from this is a measure of how badly government overregulation is holding us back. 

Then there is the longstanding matter of softwood lumber. The US claims the Canadian system in effect subsidizes Canadian lumber. What then is the problem? Do we, indeed, want to subsidize lumber going to the US with our taxpayer dollars? Why not get full value? Suppose this means fewer exports. Is there no value in allowing some trees to remain standing? Do we not want to preserve more forest cover? Allow for more carbon capture? Even if we do not, no value, no money, is lost, by conserving the resource. The value of the lumber remains in the tree to be exploited later. Other than subsidizing specific businesses, why should the Canadian government have a problem here?

In sum, the real problem here is that we Canadians are suckers easily exploited by cynical politicians appealing to a juvenile anti-Americanism. Elbows up, indeed.

Avi Lewis as NDP Leader

 

The Canadian NDP has just selected Avi Lewis as their new leader. All the pundits, predictably, are calling this a big mistake. He was the furthest left of the available candidates. They say he cannot possibly expand their voting base.

This is their idee fixe, that everyone should run to the middle. This does not work in a time when people are genuinely upset with government. This does not work in a revolutionary period. Consider Ronald Reagan—he was the farthest right candidate for the Republicans in 1980. And he swept the electoral college. 

Right now, voters everywhere are demanding change. Consider the relative success recently of parties of the far left and far right. The Greens, Reform, and Restore in the UK. Trump, Sanders and Mamdani in the US. Meloni, Takaichi, Milei and the like. Granted, the surge is stronger on the far right than the far left, but both are surging. It might even be true that without appealing to the moderate middle the NDP can never win a majority, or enough support to form a government. But that was never a realistic goal for the NDP. Their reason d’etre is to be a protest party.

If the NDP moves to the middle, they simply overlap the Liberals. Why would a moderate then vote NDP, who have no history of ever winning government, over the Liberals, Canada’s “natural governing party”? If the policy proposals are more or less the same, it makes no sense.

Moreover, that is the very strategy recently pursued by Jagmeet Singh; we see the results. The NDP becomes irrelevant.

Whither Canada?

 

Morgentaler

Bill C-9 has now passed the Canadian House of Commons and is going to the Senate. It removes the religious exemption from the charge of hate. One can now be sent to prison for two years for quoting scripture, if the passage goes against current government views.

At this point, I wonder if Canada is redeemable. I wonder whether I live in Sodom and Gomorrah, or in Canaan. Indeed, I have wondered this since Henry Morgentaler was given the Order of Canada in 2008. How can I feel true patriot love for a country that formally honours someone for killing children? And actually in violation of the law of the day? How can I honour a nation that dishonours itself?

How can I honour a country that now allows unrestricted abortion? How can I tolerate allegiance to a country that will put the poor, the sick or the elderly to death? How can I revere a country that does not recognize private property, a government that freezes people’s bank accounts? This is all National Socialism only barely warmed over. This violates the terms of the social contract under which we can give allegiance to any government, as outlined in the American Declaration of Independence: government exists to protect our rights to life, liberty, and property. If a government, like the current Canadian government, instead violates our right to life, our freedom of speech, or our property rights, our duty is to overturn it.

I don’t even see, at this point, how electing a Conservative government could save Canada. 

Canada cannot become again a free country, firstly, unless all the “hate laws” are repealed, and the right to free expression as guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is at last honoured, as it is in the USA.

This much can be done. Euthanasia can be rescinded. Abortion can be criminalized. But I doubt the CPC or the electorate itself has the will. And the democratic will does not in itself equal freedom: Hitler in Germany was democratically elected.

As with Europe, Canadian culture and society is being flooded with mass immigration. It is madness, at the very time that the futurists and the high-tech mavens are advising that within a few years most human jobs will be obsolete. All new immigrants are potentially public charges.

We ought also, at that, to promote assimilation, not multiculturalism; the Canadian social fabric is fraying, not to mention access to basic services. But here we face a bigger problem: multiculturalism is actually enshrined in the constitution. Worse, the Canadian constitution is almost impossible to amend. 

We must also, urgently, end any fiction of aboriginal land title or special aboriginal rights. It doesn’t just hobble resource development, impoverishing the country: the courts have declared that aboriginal title supersedes private property. This cannot stand; nor can the basic notion of two classes of citizens with different rights. 

Unfortunately, again, aboriginal rights are enshrined in our current constitution, almost impossible to amend.

More generally, the authority given by the current constitution to the Canadian Supreme Court to reject, overturn, or demand, legislation of our elected bodies, is a violation of our democratic and our human rights. It is autocratic rule by an unelected clique. 

But this too cannot be corrected given our constitution.

Accordingly, we seem to face only three ways to save what we can of Canada as a free country. The first is revolution; but revolutions are always dangerous, and rarely turn out well. When you throw the royal sceptre in the street, there is no telling who will pick it up. The second is deconfederation: provinces could either go their own with their own new constitution, or separate in order to negotiate new terms of union. But this would require years of tumult, dislocation, and uncertainty. And the third is a takeover by a foreign power—most obviously, the US. They might impose a new constitution or governing system, as they did once for Japan. Or they might allow us to enter their union—and be given its protection for our rights.

Looking at each of the options, the one that seems surest, safest, and least painful is the last.

Just sayin’.

In Defense of Tobacco and Alcohol

 

My Chinese student had an interesting thought. With alcohol and tobacco made so expensive by government fiat in a place like Canada, what can the average Canadian do to escape their stress? It seems to him a cruel tax on the poor: those who cannot afford a vacation in Acapulco or a yacht or summer cottage or the like.

This prompts a second thought: is this in part why we have a growing crisis with fentanyl, suicide, self-harm, social discord, sudden violence, and “mental illness”? Because we have restricted access to relatively safe and less expensive opiates? 

Yes, we have marijuana expensively but extensively available. But cannabis has a different effect. Yes, we have growing access to video games. But these are not that calming; more exciting.

It is a strength of Chinese culture that they are sensitive to stress and its amelioration. I believe we in European and American culture are lousy at it. We ought to take some lessons here. Worth considering, at least.

The Solo Christian

Please check it out on SubStack. No charge--hoping you will subscribe to our stream.

Kharg Island

There is much talk of the US seizing Iran’s Kharg Island. This makes sense; it gives the Americans control of Iran’s oil exports. Were I the Americans, though, I’d want three more islands: Qeshm, Hormuz, and Larak. These are in the Straits of Hormuz. The US could establish permanent bases there, and be able to control the Straits from then on, like the British at Gibraltar or, back in the day, Singapore. No more nonsense about the British, or the Qataris, or the Emiratis, not allowing them to use their bases on their territory.