Canada in The Inferno: A Nation of Nowheremen

Nobody likes a fence sitter. Think about how frustrating it is to deal with such a person. Indecisiveness without merit or base is immoral. Playing the role of a virtuous society without committing to its advancement in any meaningful manner is virtue without hope or integrity. Being such a person leaves itself vulnerable to virtuous paganism. We all know that Dante had a place in hell for such citizens.

Canada has become such a person. Its incomprehensible decision to opt out and give up its seat, hence its sovereignty, in anti-missile defense for political expediency has exposed the core skeleton frame of this utterly hollow land. It's not necessarily that they decided against it but rather in how they handled the whole issue. Nor is this restricted to the hellish halls of Parliament, but it finds expression within the walls of modern academia who mistake double-governance (in much the same spirit of double-speak) for prudent defense of Canadian values and interests.

Canadians who support such a ghastly form of phantom leadership can not be blamed since they have been lulled into a world of abominable incompetence. There are no great statesmen in Canada and it looks like there never will be. Canadians have struck a comfort zone with the heinous corruption of modern Liberal polity. In other words, they have accepted that this is as good as it gets. Parochialism has entrenched itself for good within all corners of this land.

Canadians continue to dance and frolic like naked natives leaving romantic footprints in the sand. Perhaps it is time for the United States, for Canada's own good, to simply leave Canada to its own devices? To actually go out and earn back its place among the great nations? That thinking itself as a major player and acting like one are two different things? One thing we are predisposed to remind ourselves of is the great national myth, among many, that we are a peace-loving nation and that this single elusive and unmanageable value is enough to send goodwill messages to madmen and rogue states. As if to say, no doubt, that America is not. That somehow America, in simply defending itself, is inviting, in all its pseudo-liberal nonsense, an attack.

This is not the act of a paranoid and war-like hegemon. Instead, this decision is rooted in prudent and pragmatic, if not sober, realities. America's interest, by virtue of its similar culture to ours, ends up being ours anyway. We tend to bicker about the pointless details that help us to feel better about our precarious self-esteem. The difference between Canada and the U.S. is that America is a global super power that takes this responsibility seriously. Whenever Canada fails to appreciate this fact, it should come as no surprise to thin-skinned Canadians that Americans will humour us. On many fronts Canada has the benefit of being under the radar screen of evil madness. We should be thankful. Up to a point. Canada, its delusional outlook notwithstanding, is under threat whether it chooses to acknowledge this or not. Instead, like spoiled ungrateful teenagers, we spite our parents knowing all along that we are wrong. Teenagers of this sort only tend to grow up when something terrible or embarrassing happens to them.

Finding a thread as to why Canadians engage in hopeless anti-American rhetoric is easy. We have a weak sense of who we are and this becomes apparent when we try and project a view of ourselves that is simply not real. Either Canadians believe there is a terrorist threat or they do not. Most acknowledge its existence but completely misunderstand its nature. To simply say that engaging in a defense pact does not solve the problem of terrorism is besides the point. The United States, not without fact or base, see a global imminent possibility of a missile threat. America's concern is security and to smugly dismiss this as an over reaction is a gross example of utter ignorance. Canada, as mentioned, has the pleasure of being inconsequential. This allows us to pretend and go on playing with our dolls.

Of course, if and when a missile is hurled at Canada, the Canadian government will react like a deer about to be hit by a Mac truck. Imagine, for instance, if Canada had been invaded by the Soviets during the Cold War? The howls demanding that Americans defend us would have been deafening.

Some may think that such a decision, even without explanation, is the right choice. How? Explain how this posture is even remotely beneficial to Canadian interests? One professor from UBC, in refined tones, smugly remarked that the Americans have incredible economic interests here so their anger will be mitigated against such a reality. Say what? His economic math is in dire need of a new lesson.

America can afford a complete shut down of its borders.....to the world. It is our un-diversified and cumbersome economic base that is dangerously tied into the U.S. economy. It is this kind of thinking that concerns me most. We have accepted that it is ok for Canada to say one thing for public consumption so as not to arouse infantile anti-Americanism and do quite another behind the scenes. Where is the honor in this?

Is this a Canadian value at work? Even Pierre Elliott Trudeau invoked the WAR MEASURES ACT when he felt Canada was under threat. This is what leaders do. They act even when the decision is bound to be unpopular. Statesmanship is an outward reflection of a society's collective attitudes, beliefs and values. Canada, by absolving itself of some of the most crucial issues in a post 9/11 global system, projects itself like a thief who shiftily looks around as he escapes. Once he is free he stands erect and claims his place among civil society.

Canadians, it seems, have carefully constructed a world of neat justifications for its banal and hypocritical behaviour. Eternal grafters have all eaten away at the core and soul of this once promising land. Canada sits nowhere but on a fence with its knees, quivering slaves to the omnipotent vote. Which leads me to the following question - What good is a democratic vote when its moral compass has been all but raped of its integrity?