The erosion of free trade, institutional balance, and civil liberty threatens Canada’s national interest—and the Western world it helped shape.
What does it mean to be ‘conservative’ or ‘liberal’ today?
The partisan definitions are well-known in Canada, and many other nations use ‘conservative’ & ‘liberal’ as shorthand for ‘right’ and ‘left’. But this neat and easy division of voters into opposing camps is becoming less and less relevant.
Consider the case of the man currently destabilizing markets: U.S. President Donald Trump.
Donald Trump is the head of the Republican Party, a party that considers itself conservative. His opposition – the Democratic Party – is nominally considered a ‘liberal’ party. Yet, when we look at Donald Trump’s trade actions – and overall approach to executive power – we see few elements of what were considered to be core Western conservative values.
The most venerated Western conservative leaders of the 20th Century – Churchill, Reagan, Thatcher, Mulroney – were all pro-trade, pro-democracy, pro-NATO, and pro-market. They were classical liberals who, despite some policy differences, had an overarching worldview that prioritized individual freedom above centralized government power. In this way, they were conservatives in the sense of defending the core values that helped build the Western world.
Now, it would be false to give conservatives all the credit for the prosperity of the Post-WW2 era. ‘Liberal’ leaders like Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry Truman (serving as U.S. President from 1945-1953), and William Lyon Mackenzie King helped see their nations through the Great Depression and the Second World War, and then helped set up the foundation that still underpins global prosperity today.
They moved the world towards an embrace of freer trade, a peaceful Europe, universal ideas of human rights, and defensive alliances (NATO). When this world order started to shift towards statism, a new generation of leaders (Reagan, Thatcher, Mulroney) promoted even freer trade, more fiscal restraint, and lower taxes, while maintaining the important parts of the world order by strengthening NATO and continuing to emphasize the primacy of human freedom.
This was the peak of Western conservatism. It effectively conserved – and enhanced – the strength of the Western world at a time when the West was under severe threat from the USSR and other Communist States.
A broad pro-freedom consensus
While still divisive in the post-Second World War era, politics in the Western world was often much more congenial than today. And a key reason for this is that there was a true ‘big tent’. The centre-left and centre-right were defenders of a classical liberal order, even as they defended it in different ways. Both ‘sides’ supported relatively free markets, relatively free trade (tariffs were relatively low even before official free trade agreements), and there was a generally consistent move towards the expansion of personal freedoms. To the left and centre left’s credit, it is they who were often the most vigorous in the defence of expanding rights to a larger swath of society, including equality for women, Civil Rights, and the protection of LGBT People. Meanwhile, the centre-right tended to focus more on expanding economic freedom. This led to a long-term expansion of freedom across most domains, ushering in a golden age for humanity relative to all that had come before.
Classical liberalism had proven itself as more resilient than its challengers. Socialism, fascism, and other authoritarian ideologies simply could not deliver the consistent level of economic prosperity, individual freedom, and relative global peace as classical liberalism.
The Erosion of Western Ideals
This is now all being put at risk.
Donald Trump poses the greatest challenge to classical liberalism in a generation, not only by opposing its principles, but by leading the very nation once most committed to their global defence.
In many ways, Trumpism blends ideological extremes: hostility to free trade and “elites” echoes far-left populism, while admiration for authoritarian figures and suspicion of outsiders reflect far-right instincts.
Like the far-right, Trumpism refuses to grapple with the complexity of the world and yearns for a falsely idealized past. Like the far left, Trumpism blames the Western world for everything.
Both extremes share a disdain for knowledge work and an over-romanticization of physical labour. Both view scientific expertise and free inquiry with suspicion when the facts contradict ideological predilections, often leading to a search for convenient scapegoats.
And how is that working out?
The markets are in turmoil. America is shredding credibility. China and Russia are emboldened. Legal U.S. residents languish in foreign prisons. Alliances are at risk. Instability reigns. The U.S. President has concentrated power to such an extent that he can single-handedly wreak havoc with the global trading order on a whim.
These ideological trends aren’t confined to rhetoric—they’re having measurable effects on economic and political stability.
Without the confidence and stability of strong classical liberal institutions, it has become much more challenging to plan for the future, with many acquisitions and IPOs on hold:
“Among the deals, Swedish fintech Klarna pulled its IPO, and San Francisco fintech Chime is also delaying its initial offering, according to people familiar with the deals.
A London private equity firm pulled out of buying a European mid-cap tech company at the last minute on Thursday after the tariff news, a person close to the deal said.
StubHub was set as recently as Thursday to start its investor roadshow next week for its already delayed IPO. But by the end of the day, executives decided to push those plans back for at least another week.
Israeli-based financial services company eToro also delayed investor presentations for its IPO on Wall Street from Monday until after April 20 due to market conditions and volatility, according to someone familiar with the deal.
“It will be very tricky to get any deal to the finish line as cost of debt is expected to go up and it will be harder to ascertain valuations of companies,” a senior banker said.
If the trend continues, it could stifle companies’ ability to raise funds and to invest, further slowing economic growth.”
It turns out that ‘post-liberal’ quasi-authoritarian leadership is not exactly conducive to prosperity.
As we realize that we took classical liberalism for granted, we are confronted with the unsettling reality of a post-liberal (or post-democratic) political environment. But it doesn’t need to be like this. We can stop taking classical liberalism for granted.
Rather than indulging in personality cults, we can return to a principled defence of free markets, free people, free thought, institutional checks and balances, reliable alliances, and a renewed respect for reason, expertise, and the liberal democratic tradition that built the modern West.
Spencer Fernando
Spencer Fernando is a Canadian political commentator who writes about national sovereignty, democratic institutions, and Canada’s geopolitical future. This article is part of a broader effort to revive classical liberal values amid rising global instability.
Like this piece? Subscribe for more writing on Canada’s place in a shifting world—and the ideas worth preserving. Subscribe here.
If this piece left you clearer than it found you, that's the point. I write for readers who want to think past the week, to see the longer pattern beneath the daily story, and to come away steadier rather than more agitated.
That longer view gets built somewhere. On Patreon, essay by essay, I'm constructing The Long Work, a body of analysis meant to outlast the news cycle that prompted it. The readers there make it possible. No subsidies, no strings. The work answers to them.
$8/month to read it as it's built, and to have a hand in building it.