Canada needs a Populist alternative to the Progressive Conservatives, lest the side of excessive social progress upheave our political institutions and turn our culture into a war of social justice warriors seeking to claim the throne of political correctness. Canada needs an outlet to address the Populist sentiments of the labour left and the white working class majority, while also maintaining the social conservatism and traditional culture of the past millennium— traditional culture that was characterized by monocultural homogeneity and monogamous heterosexuality.
With Justin, we must not forget that this is the man who has racked up an enormous federal deficit. This is the man who wants to open borders, increase mass immigration, and go "post-national". This is the man whose regime has tried to pass laws like Motion 103 (which prohibits criticism of Islam), Bill 89 (which allows the government to take children away), and Bill C-16 (which introduces mandated speech with “proper pronouns”). This is the man who non-penetrative bestiality has been made legal under by the supreme court. This is the man who wants to lower the age for sodomy. This is the man who tried to get rid of Friday sittings and remove accountability for his actions from Parliamentary dialogue, and it’s not hard to see why.
I am convinced the only way any kind of Nationalist movement will get ahead is through the merger of Labour-Left style Socialist-Populism with Populist-Right style Economic Nationalism. Candidates like Sanders (who at one point advocated against mass immigration) and Corbyn (who stands against Israel and who favours Nationalization) need to merge with leaders like Orban (who advocates for economic nationalism and social conservatism) and Trump (who advocates for economic and civic nationalism). In terms of Canadian politics, this would look like a NDP-Conservative coalition, or it would look like a Nationalist option that facilitates this political demand.
It was under Progressive Conservatives like Diefenbaker that we moved away from a policy of ethnic homogeneity to a “points system”, only to entrench the rights of foreigners in the adoption of the Bill of Rights; and it was under Progressive Liberals like Pierre Elliot Trudeau that we adopted radical immigration policy and signed the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, only to entrench the rights of foreigners in the adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. After all, it was under Pierre Elliot Trudeau that eventually, in 1976, 1978, and 1988, we adopted immigration policies that were explicitly meant to encourage multiculturalism (such as the Multicultural Act of '88), mass immigration (such as the immigration policies of '76, and '78), and ultimately, we adopted an immigration policy that explicitly went against what was required to create a society that could afford to let immigrants in to begin with.
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.
The Indian Act is a controversial measure, and with the recent Keystone pipeline development in motion, this controversy has only been heightened. The Indian Act has its pros and cons for both Natives and Canadian citizens alike. On one hand, Canadian Citizens are burdened with money given to natives as reparations in addition to having to give up the territory which we were able to establish our institutions on, on the other hand, natives are limited within territory which they feel is rightfully theirs and they are subject to expanding industrial projects which encroach on what territory they have.