The idea that Canada is doomed if any one political leader doesn’t attain power represents an abdication of our own responsibility.
As the Conservative Party continues to struggle amid the drip, drip, drip nature of floor-crossings, there is a growing ‘dooming’ industry on social media. That ‘industry’ is centred around people talking about how Canadian democracy is supposedly ending, how the Conservative Party is finished, how there’s no point in getting involved, how Canada is going to break up, etc. In some cases, the people making those dooming comments are talking about giving up on politics or giving up on the country entirely. And many of these claims centre on the idea that disastrous things will supposedly come to pass if Pierre Poilievre no longer leads the Conservative Party, a prospect that is receiving increased attention as the Conservatives wonder how many more CPC MPs may cross the floor.
Of course, some of this is a result of Twitter now skewing to the right and of many on the right being stuck in an influencer-based echo chamber that is severely detached from public opinion (Prime Minister Mark Carney is quite popular at the moment, and much of Canada’s ‘division’ is within the political right itself, not the country at large). However, it is also a result of many people giving away their personal power to an external leader and abdicating their own sense of personal agency and strength.
Consider what it means when we proclaim that a particular leader failing to get elected means our political party or nation is coming to an end. First, it means having no confidence in said political party, as a party dependent on just one personality risks becoming a personality cult, which drains the independence and vitality of its members, ultimately leaving nothing of the individual remaining. Second, it means having no confidence in the nation, since nations dependent on one leader risk becoming cults at an even greater scale, and such dependence signals internal weakening. It means reality, as nations routinely survive ‘divisive’ elections, and so long as the electoral system remains free (as Canada’s does), those out of power today will have a chance to make their case and compete for power in a relatively short period of time. Canada has already shown that we can shift from less effective leadership to more effective leadership through our democratic political process in the free and fair 2025 election (and yes, floor crossings since then are a legitimate part of that process).
Rather than differences over election results being the main risk, history shows us that a bigger risk comes from the relationship between cult-like leaders and followers who give up their own power and individual responsibility to seek the safety of the leader-worshipping collective and take on a kind of learned helplessness. Proclamations that everything is lost if our preferred leader doesn’t win are a sign of that kind of thinking taking root.
You have significance and agency
The deeper issue here is on the personal level. By placing your sense of hope for your country in one leader and one outcome, you give away your sense of agency, and you – perhaps without knowing it – give away your sense of significance. You can’t directly control whether Pierre Poilievre becomes Prime Minister, so basing your sense of hope for Canada on that outcome means giving all your power away to something outside of yourself. The same is true for those looking for Mark Carney to ‘save’ Canada. The best any Prime Minister can do is create better conditions for individual Canadians to act in ways that strengthen Canada and ensure our long-term success as a nation. Good leaders create those conditions and bring out the best in others. Poor leaders create the opposite and bring out the worst in others. Personally, I think Carney has been a good leader so far, and I think Poilievre could be as well if he does one day become Prime Minister. But the ultimate responsibility still rests with each individual, and no amount of mental evasion changes that fundamental reality.
You have the ability to think, to create, to produce. And that means you have the ability to help shape the world around you. That is real power, and it doesn’t rely upon an external leader or collective.
Spencer Fernando
I am 100% Independent. I don't take government media subsidies, and I never will. My work is funded entirely by readers — no grants, no strings, no obligations to anyone but you.
If you find value in my independent perspective, consider making a donation:
If you want to support my work on a monthly basis and access all of my long-form writing, you can subscribe to my Patreon for $20/month or $216/year.