The Right Honourable Mark Carney

I have no expectations regarding the recent appointment of Mark Carney to the position of Prime Minister of Canada. I see Carney as somewhat of a Tony Blair-esque figure, meaning that he will ultimately continue the policies of Justin Trudeau whilst presenting them in a manner that appears more centrist and common sense. The system will continue to get what it wants, but we will have a figurehead leader who will present himself in a manner that is affable and acceptable to most Canadians. Pierre Poilievre, the leader of Canada’s so called Conservative Party, is no better and I have even less expectations for him than I do Carney. So as it stands, I do not really care who is or becomes Canada’s head of government, as they are all cut from the same cloth, and will all enact policies that are detrimental to the continuation and preservation of what once was known as British North America. Canada is slated to become essentially a secular republic with a diversity of cultures and races, ultimately becoming an economic zone for powers with a stronger sense of self than we do or are allowed to have. I believe there is still hope for Canada, but I do not expect to live to see the fruits of my desires. In the political realm which we are permitted to view and lend legitimacy¹ to, we have no power or influence to enact the policies we would like to have.

Unlike so many “conservative Canadians” internet commentators, I do not care that Mark Carney was not elected. I am a monarchist, a rather stringent one at that so having an unelected Prime Minister is, if anything, a positive development. At the very least it demonstrates to the masses the powerlessness of the people and how power nakedly operates. It was already a forgone conclusion that Carney was going to be Canada’s next leader. I did not follow the Liberal elections at all, but it was evident from CBC reports and social media feeds that Carney would “win”. Chrystia Freeland was never going to win. Her candidacy was poisoned from the start firstly by her close association with Justin Trudeau’s tenure and unpopular policies, and secondly by her betrayal of him last year. Thus, she is both the St. Peter and Judas to Trudeau’s Christ. That may be a strange and rather tortured analogy, but the great servant-betrayer is hardly an archetype that appeals to the Liberal Party elite or the masses of the electorate, who still need an occasional scrap tossed towards them. So Carney was a good fit for the Liberals. He can retain the gains the Liberals have made over the past ten years, whilst distancing himself from their missteps and he can even be presented as a non-ideological, non-radical common sense figure. The type of figure Pierre Poilievre desperately desires to be seen as but has failed to do so at every turn. Poilievre was so committed to being the anti-Trudeau that when Trudeau announced his departure from politics, Poilievre had no identity, branding, or policies to stand behind. With Carney repealing the civil component of Canada’s carbon tax, Poilievre has been robbed of his central policy position and political slogan. “Axe the tax” is a far less relevant slogan when applied to the industrial carbon tax as Pierre Poilievre has tried to reposition it.

In what I can only assume to be an attempted appeal to the right, even the traditionalist right, Mark Carney has embarked on a visit to Great Britain, wherein he received an audience from the King. Carney is establishing himself as the legitimate governmental leader, in all the ways in which I would like a Canadian Prime Minister to do. Carney has publicly affirmed Canada’s British and European heritage, in a manner that Justin Trudeau would never have, and in a manner that he would probably find disgusting and backwards. I doubt even Poilievre would make the kinds of statements Carney has because ultimately, he shares Trudeau’s views about Canada’s post-national predicament. Mark Carney, as a Liberal, had no need to denigrate or deny Canada’s European heritage, or our institutions or traditions. Canada’s heritage has for the longest time been used by liberals against those on the right as representing an evil past that needs to be both forgotten and repented for. Any celebration of Canadian identity in a traditional sense was presented as exclusionary and racist. But now, Carney is in a position to take that which has been cast aside by Canada’s political and intellectual elite and use them to both legitimize himself and his political agenda. Carney is thus now able to flank the Conservatives from the right, at least at a cultural level, which is the level that most resonates with the masses. Of course, this also aligns perfectly with the pivot to Europe that Canada seems to be making, given the current trade and diplomatic relationship we have with the United States. If America is no longer willing to tolerate the political and economic sovereignty of Canada, Europe is our best alternative. Whilst in France, Mark Carney has stated that “Canada is the most European of non-European countries”. I agree with Carney’s words, and for better or worse it is true. Canada is the most European of non-European countries, given our heritage, institutions, values and so on, these things I celebrate. Unfortunately, Canada is also like Europe in that we are both socially liberal, mired by guilt of past actions true and falsified, and are being subjected to social engineering policies that, if successful, will see the unique cultures and peoples of our nations displaced.

Liberals have seen great success in co-opting traditional institutions and using them to promote their ideology. Liberals will take tradition as a skin suit and use it to legitimize the moving away from tradition and progress. We can see what liberals have done to institutions like mainline Protestant churches as an example. This is what I ultimately believe Mark Carney is attempting to do. If he wants to challenge the United States’ domination over the continent, he cannot do so by alienating those he need not alienate. Giving recognition to Red Tories and nostalgic old-stock Euro-Canadians is something which both costs him nothing politically and in the public mind, recenters the Liberal Party and restores it to the position of being Canada’s natural governing party once again. Furthermore, as we have seen online, under the radicalism of Trudeau, Canada did not have a strong identity or sense of self. The best that right-wing Canadians could muster was a bastardized form of American republicanism, as we saw in the trucker protests and in Albertan conservatism. Carney is once again giving Canadians an identity and heritage that we can all be united under. For the right it is identitarianism and tradition, and on the left it is liberal values which will be presented as the fulfillment of the traditions that rightist Canadians value. My hope would be that Carney is successful in restoking the Canadian identity that has been lost to us for decades, and that Canadian identity once reasserted can be used to clear out all that has been established and implemented since its dissolution. Canadian identity and nationalism, if permitted to exist again, can and will destroy that which has and those who have usurped our nation’s inheritance and destiny.

Of course, Mark Carney and those like him do not wish to see a return of Canadian identity. They instead wish to flirt with national symbols and traditions, creating a “brand identity” and “brand loyalty” to a Canada which they wish to use to challenge the United States and Donald Trump. My hope is that Canadian nationalism is something which, once released, is too vigorous to be contained again. Canadians have until this point been denied their history and identity and are yearning for it. Some look to the United States and its identity and ideals as a substitute, but once the Canadian weltanschauung is permitted once again, the alien notions of the southern republic will be unable to hold any sway over us.

Mark Carney is still a liberal and he will not challenge liberal principles (one need only to look into his child Sasha Carney for evidence of that). Canada leads the world in liberalism, and even for the liberals of Europe and the United States, Canada is viewed as radical. Although I do not believe that Carney will openly champion progressivist policies, he will not refute them either and may even find a way to use conservative or rightist language to defend liberal immigration, cultural, and sexual policies. Culture is downstream of law and therefore Canadian culture cannot be modified until laws are rectified. Mark Carney is of the elite class, and thus he believes he has the knowledge and right to rule and dictate policy to the masses; however, he is also cognizant of the nature of power and how ideology must be subordinated if one is able to keep the favour of this most pagan of gods.² If Carney makes Canadian identity acceptable again, when he makes statements that not a year earlier could have been condemned and legally sanctioned as hate speech if spoken by the wrong person, he is buying the rope by which his values and ideals will be hanged. Mark Carney is a man of the system, but his selection and ascendance to power could be the fatal mistake which brings down the whole facade of liberal democracy in Canada, and even Europe as well. The history and traditions Carney has brought recognition to and made publicly acceptable are antithetical to the morality and values he holds. Once the values of the Old Dominion are invoked, they necessarily challenge those of modern Canada and if we are granted space to renegotiate these values, those of modernity will by their questioning be falsified. The philosophy of liberalism and progress is not something that can be challenged within its mental framework, as that which is modern is viewed as correct and moral. To challenge that which is new with that which is old calls into question the philosophy of progress and its moral assumptions, rendering it falsified based upon the inconsistency of its first principle and presuppositions. Canada has been the leading example of global liberalism, multiculturalism, and human rights. Alas these things will not, as Carney knows, save this country and nation from the power and influence of a hostile or ambivalent United States. If Canadian nationalism supersedes Canadian post-nationalism, this anti-civilizational ideology will meet its end and be decisively falsified. Canada can again be an example to Europe and the world once Canadians are permitted to rediscover and be proud of who they are, and could even be leaders in a post-liberal world order.

1https://godkingandnation.wordpress.com/2021/08/14/why-i-will-never-vote-again-and-why-you-shouldnt-either/

2https://godkingandnation.wordpress.com/2022/11/04/the-pagan-nature-of-power/