Does a national identity really matter that much anymore? I don’t think so. Middle power countries all have distinct identities but none are exceptional as would be expected.
What is more important is economic opportunity of citizens. As this discussion highlights, there is no clear idea of what economic nationalism is or should be. This is a concern, because the economic gravity of neighboring America has continued to exert a steadily stronger pull since Confederation. This is the existential threat in my opinion.
Well said and spot on! It all comes down to economic dynamism and how to achieve this across all sectors and geographies in Canada. Without economic success and the financial freedom that affords, a nation can’t find its footing around social affairs. What is frustrating is seeing bias on the left and right confuse the optionality discussion on how to achieve success. No simple answers but let’s focus on centrism to achieve the greatest chance of success economically and socially. Fear those with overly simplistic and extreme positions economically and socially.
In a time of a declining, desperately flailing, U.S. empire retracing its steps as a race-state, national identity, especially for Canada, is essential. We cannot be so post-modern, not to mention craven, in our thinking to ignore the vastness and richness of Canada and the importance of denying said to the unfolding fascist project to the south. This was the mistake of the anti-globalization movement which decontextualized Canada - ignored the U.S. empire and Canada's role in it- in favour of generalities and slogans (i.e.,think globally, act locally), while refusing to present a vision of the country as a separate entity in favour of an anti-materialist notion of 'no borders'.
Ceding the terrain of the Canadian state, the notion of a sovereign political geographic space called Canada, could potentially be the most irresponsible, criminally negligent act in the history of the Canadian left. The neoliberal, and now libertarian, right were more than happy to claim ownership and push the agenda of continentalism, or 'deep integration' within the rubrick of TINA (There Is No Alternative). They grabbed the flag and ran with it while the left in Canada, from the NDP on down, fiddled with an imported liberalism that ignored the threat of annexationist ambitions next door, and an ascendant 5th column at home while becoming more irrelevant by the day. Canadian nationalism, like the Canadian state, was abandoned to the right.
Gauche, indeed.
Our responsibility as stewards of Canada, is to learn from the deliberately obtuse ideological gymnastics above (among others not touched on here) and develop, implement, and defend an alternative, unapologetic vision on the North American continent. To do this protecting, and greatly strengthing, Canada's sovereignty is of prime importance. To make that happen means developing a programme of popular sovereignty that appeals to the broad masses of Canadian society, explicitly rejects racism and xenophobia, while promoting development of human and productive capacities to ensure that Canada is a fit place to live, work, and grow to our fullest potential as human beings. This means re-directing capital and productive capacities toward activities such as housing construction, broad based infrastructure improvements, re-purposing of manufacturing facilities, research and development, mass public education through post-secondary, and a re-vitalized public health care system - just to name some key areas.
And, yes, Canadians will need to take national defence much more seriously, and this will entail a national discussion as opposed to default, top-down approach we see today.
I believe the situation we are in makes it impossible to pursue continentalism. It also makes it impossible for us to casually choose our national identity, like it was a thought experiment.
I don't think we can really understand who we are as Canada without being put to the test in some way. (Thinking of Ukrainians here).
We don't have the luxury of time. We need to quickly figure out ways to build an economic contrast between the US and ourselves. At least, we need to send clear signals about these intentions. Without some sense of predictability for the future it will be impossible to "relax" into a form of socially-minded nationalism (the type that Ed Broadbent espoused). We just won't have the money.
We need our national and provincial governments to come to agreement on critical economic issues. Our situation with the US changing so quickly, and so closely to us, means the world as we find it is no longer playing a casual, predictable, safe game. There is a sense of urgency in the moment. With the US pursuing economic nationalism (sloppily, I would add) Canada, meaning federal and provincial levels of gov't, are being forced into a counter-version of Canadian economic nationalism.
Does a national identity really matter that much anymore? I don’t think so. Middle power countries all have distinct identities but none are exceptional as would be expected.
What is more important is economic opportunity of citizens. As this discussion highlights, there is no clear idea of what economic nationalism is or should be. This is a concern, because the economic gravity of neighboring America has continued to exert a steadily stronger pull since Confederation. This is the existential threat in my opinion.
Well said and spot on! It all comes down to economic dynamism and how to achieve this across all sectors and geographies in Canada. Without economic success and the financial freedom that affords, a nation can’t find its footing around social affairs. What is frustrating is seeing bias on the left and right confuse the optionality discussion on how to achieve success. No simple answers but let’s focus on centrism to achieve the greatest chance of success economically and socially. Fear those with overly simplistic and extreme positions economically and socially.
In a time of a declining, desperately flailing, U.S. empire retracing its steps as a race-state, national identity, especially for Canada, is essential. We cannot be so post-modern, not to mention craven, in our thinking to ignore the vastness and richness of Canada and the importance of denying said to the unfolding fascist project to the south. This was the mistake of the anti-globalization movement which decontextualized Canada - ignored the U.S. empire and Canada's role in it- in favour of generalities and slogans (i.e.,think globally, act locally), while refusing to present a vision of the country as a separate entity in favour of an anti-materialist notion of 'no borders'.
Ceding the terrain of the Canadian state, the notion of a sovereign political geographic space called Canada, could potentially be the most irresponsible, criminally negligent act in the history of the Canadian left. The neoliberal, and now libertarian, right were more than happy to claim ownership and push the agenda of continentalism, or 'deep integration' within the rubrick of TINA (There Is No Alternative). They grabbed the flag and ran with it while the left in Canada, from the NDP on down, fiddled with an imported liberalism that ignored the threat of annexationist ambitions next door, and an ascendant 5th column at home while becoming more irrelevant by the day. Canadian nationalism, like the Canadian state, was abandoned to the right.
Gauche, indeed.
Our responsibility as stewards of Canada, is to learn from the deliberately obtuse ideological gymnastics above (among others not touched on here) and develop, implement, and defend an alternative, unapologetic vision on the North American continent. To do this protecting, and greatly strengthing, Canada's sovereignty is of prime importance. To make that happen means developing a programme of popular sovereignty that appeals to the broad masses of Canadian society, explicitly rejects racism and xenophobia, while promoting development of human and productive capacities to ensure that Canada is a fit place to live, work, and grow to our fullest potential as human beings. This means re-directing capital and productive capacities toward activities such as housing construction, broad based infrastructure improvements, re-purposing of manufacturing facilities, research and development, mass public education through post-secondary, and a re-vitalized public health care system - just to name some key areas.
And, yes, Canadians will need to take national defence much more seriously, and this will entail a national discussion as opposed to default, top-down approach we see today.
A helpful and informative discussion. Thank-you.
I believe the situation we are in makes it impossible to pursue continentalism. It also makes it impossible for us to casually choose our national identity, like it was a thought experiment.
I don't think we can really understand who we are as Canada without being put to the test in some way. (Thinking of Ukrainians here).
We don't have the luxury of time. We need to quickly figure out ways to build an economic contrast between the US and ourselves. At least, we need to send clear signals about these intentions. Without some sense of predictability for the future it will be impossible to "relax" into a form of socially-minded nationalism (the type that Ed Broadbent espoused). We just won't have the money.
We need our national and provincial governments to come to agreement on critical economic issues. Our situation with the US changing so quickly, and so closely to us, means the world as we find it is no longer playing a casual, predictable, safe game. There is a sense of urgency in the moment. With the US pursuing economic nationalism (sloppily, I would add) Canada, meaning federal and provincial levels of gov't, are being forced into a counter-version of Canadian economic nationalism.