Share with your friends










Submit

As of May, this year, the Conference Board of Canada released the latest installment of its “How Canada Performs: Innovation Report Card”. It should come as no surprise that Canada scored relatively low, maintaining its C grade and 12th place ranking. It should also come as no surprise that Canada falls behind countries like Switzerland, the U.S., and Denmark, all of which rely on either more protectionist or more socially corporatist economic models which allow for greater domestic funding in R&D. Canada, on the other hand, like many other nations, is plagued by Neoliberalism, which stifles national investment and innovation and, at best, makes nations into colonies for foreign companies to exploit for their resources.

At this point, Canada cannot even boast of having great private works let alone great public works, and perhaps our reliance on private entities over the nation state is responsible for this. The Hudson’s Bay company was sold to NRDC Equity Partners in the U.S., Tim Hortons was sold to Burger King, and Hydro One has been privatized. It should be noted that this occurred under the so called Progressive “Conservatives” as much as it has under the Liberals.

On this note, don’t trust either Liberal or Conservative for a second when it comes to their commitment to healthcare or transportation. The TTC is already partially privatized, it is only a matter of time before our healthcare system is privatized as well, and we will see huge levels of instability when it comes to health insurance providers trying to compete with national economies of scale. The real question is why our healthcare system isn’t more efficient, given its scale, and why our government isn’t maximizing its revenue in order to fund these things in the best manner possible.

As if the current state of affairs isn’t bad enough, if you remember from Canadian history, this tendency to scrap projects which invoke some degree of national sovereignty goes back as far as Diefenbaker, who represented an earlier strain of “Progressive Conservative” that was almost as spineless as the type we see today. Let’s not forget the extent to which Avro Canada was completely dejected when the Avro Arrow was scrapped.

It is noteworthy how Sweden seems to score the highest on the innovation report, however when you factor in that this report considers inclusivity to be a determinant of technological growth, this makes sense. Ironically, countries like Denmark, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Norway, and even Sweden, all of which have a much greater white majority than Canada, seem to be doing better than Canada.

It’s interesting how Canada, even in light of its rapidly declining European descended population, scores so low. Perhaps, while excluding Sweden’s excessive diversity agenda and high nordic IQ as a factor for success, Canada’s demographic changes might be dragging it down?

Interestingly enough, Germany seems to be doing quite poorly as well… Perhaps for the same reasons as Canada?

A nation of great public works requires unity and authority in order to ensure cohesive momentum. One needs monoculture, a large degree of ethnic homogeneity, and one needs a strong nation state to centralize its institutions. This is how the West has moved forward for the majority of the past millennium, and it is only with the introduction of open elections, open markets, open borders, and open debate that we saw the subversion of our drive for purity and power over the past two centuries.

When you open social dynamics up, you create a power vacuum which inevitably closes. The question is, will this close in a way that is optimal for industrial, military, and technological development (as well as social cohesion) or not? The answer to this question is to look back to the way that our ancestors have succeeded enough to survive up until this point.

The most successful model for social organization has been with monocultural, ethnically homogeneous, heterosexual, monogamous, and authoritarian states (whether feudal, absolutist, nationalist, or even federalist). You need a strong state to maintain the traditional values required for constructing a human society, what with its two sexes, distinct ethnic groups, and factionalist tendencies. This state, and these values, ultimately maintain cohesion between the two genders, cohesion among the race, and the rule of one faction over all who would question the militant state of peace that would be established.

We must not forget that the influence of Spartanic models, like those outlined above, ultimately gave birth to public institutions like NASA in the USA, which over the last century, could be argued to be one of the greatest organizations in terms of its contributions to humanity. The rocket and jet programs in both the U.S. and U.S.S.R. were pioneered by people like Werner von Braun, who was recruited among many scientists of the Third Reich, which itself was based on a strong state model that was able to build itself up to a point where it was able to finance massive great works, like the autobahn, and many other technical achievements like rocket propulsion. The extent to which corporatist-authoritarian nations were able to build themselves up in the 1930’s (in general) was a thing that the leaders of the allied nations were in awe of. From leaders FDR to Churchill to Mackenzie King, it was hard to ignore the success of more economically nationalist agendas in terms of keeping the national economy thriving and afloat during what was a great depression for many other nations. It was with the influence from the smaller authoritarian countries of the axis that the much larger countries of the allies were able to just barely win World War 2.

I wonder, if this report were to widen its scale to encompass more eastern authoritarian countries like Singapore or Dubai, whether it would make a difference. I think what we would see is that the idea that multicultural, liberal democracy provides the most innovative model simply isn’t true. This should not come as a surprise either, given that Germany and the U.K. both developed their industry under the rule of kings and kaisers competing in an arms race well before our age of mass migration.

* If you would like to access premium content and videos here at The Red Ensign, consider becoming a subscriber: www.redensign.ca/subscribe. Only monthly subscribers get media access to interviews and behind-the-scenes engagements of the Canadian Nationalist Party.

Author

Maurice Porter

Located in Ontario, Canada, Maurice Porter is a journalist who focuses on history and current affairs from a nationalist perspective. Having attended university in Waterloo, Porter studied history, politics, and philosophy from a Western perspective. Maurice manages the MacDonald Institute and wrote the MacDonald Mandate, which is currently being used by the Canadian Nationalist Party.