Canada and the Illusion of Choice

When analyzing the political landscape in Canada, it becomes evident that the Overton window is confined to varying degrees of socialism. Each election, Canadians seem to have the choice between moderate socialism, socialism, or radical socialism.

I understand this statement may seem provocative. Socialism traditionally implies government ownership of economic production, as opposed to private ownership of property and capital. However, consider these points:

• High Tax Rates: Canada's tax rates often rival those of China, a Communist country. The average citizen pays over 50% in taxes. Canada’s government gets more of its citizens' money than they do. 

• Supply Management: Canada is one of the few advanced nations with Supply Management, where the government controls agricultural production with the intention of controlling the pricing of products. 

• State-Dependent Media: Most media outlets rely on state funding. The CRTC mandates content quotas for radio and television.

• Government-Controlled Sectors: The government heavily or entirely subsidizes education, healthcare, and transportation. The state also monopolizes alcohol, gambling, and marijuana.

These are just a select few examples of the pervasive role of the government in Canada’s economy. Excessive state intervention contradicts the idea of Canada as a free-market capitalist democracy, a label often used but arguably inaccurate.

In Canada, advocating for less government involvement often results in being labelled as greedy or heartless. It’s almost as though government involvement in the economy has become a part of the Canadian national identity. There's a pervasive belief that free-market capitalism is immoral and that the government should address material inequality in areas such as housing, transportation, healthcare, and education. However, what if government intervention is the cause, not the cure, for these issues?

Why the Rich and Powerful Support Socialism

Promoting free-market ideals often leads to accusations of supporting corporate interests. Yet, the wealthiest individuals and corporations rarely fund libertarian or anarcho-capitalist politicians. Instead, they often support candidates who are going to increase government spending. Why would this be?

People believe social programs and spending aid the downtrodden, but this is misleading. Modern governments often fund deficit spending by printing more money, leading to two major consequences:

• Inflation: Printing money increases the money supply without increasing goods and services, driving up prices. This benefits asset owners (the wealthy) while diminishing the purchasing power of those living paycheque-to-paycheque.

• Taxes: The central bank issues money in exchange for government bonds, creating public debt. The government pays this debt, with interest, through taxation. Canadian taxpayers currently spend tens of billions of dollars annually on interest for government debt.

Therefore, heavy government spending effectively increases state power, enriches bankers through interest, and boosts the value of assets owned by the wealthy. This dynamic was evident during the pandemic, where "free" money for citizens resulted in the largest upward wealth transfer in history.

The Cure

To achieve prosperity, Canada needs radical autonomy, mass deregulation, and an end to deficit spending. This involves eliminating bureaucratic hurdles for small businesses, reducing oppressive taxes, and unleashing individual creativity. If socialism is the disease, free-market capitalism and true liberalism are the cure.

Voting alone isn't enough. Citizens must demand minimal state power to achieve freedom and wealth. The problem is not who is in charge of our gigantic state, it’s that our state is gigantic. Central planning inevitably leads to dictatorship and economic suffocation. No central authority can match the decentralized decision-making power of the market.

There is a principle called subsidiarity, which I strongly support, that asserts local problem-solving is most effective. In other words, tasks should be handled by the smallest and least complex entity capable of addressing them. This approach prioritizes decentralization, empowering individuals, private and religious organizations, charities, and municipal governments to take action before involving larger federal bureaucracies or welfare states. Those who are closest to an issue are typically better equipped to manage it efficiently and on a more personal level.

If Canada is to survive this massive bureaucratic cancer, the spirit of freedom and decentralization must become the common sentiment of citizens.