Draw the Line action, Ottawa, September 20, 2025, part of a country-wide day of action against the Carney government’s anti-social pro-war agenda.
The measures taken by the Carney government since it took over power after the last election confirm this government’s adherence to the methods Carney and several of his ministers and point men of the state learned at Goldman Sachs. Previous employment in that institution seems to be in fashion at this time.
To see how Carney rules over not only his cabinet, but also the Liberal caucus, the House of Commons and Canada as a whole, it is enough to look at the “One Goldman Sachs” approach: “Leveraging its collective intellectual capital and diverse talent to serve clients. Key principles include prioritizing client interests above all else, upholding the highest ethical standards [as per his British colonial values of course — TML Ed. Note], striving for superior results, fostering a culture of teamwork and professional growth, and cultivating a diverse workforce.”
All of the above is what Carney claims represents the interests of the polity and Canada’s raison d’état – reason of state. Carney is proudly restructuring the state at the fastest speed possible, serving the interests of what are called “stakeholders,” which match his own.
He deprives the many and varied different interests which exist in the society of meaning and renders them as values directed at identifying with whatever he says is the national interest at this time. The people are told that the national interest of the U.S., or Britain, or Canada, or the European Union, is the interest of the world’s people for peace, democracy, and rights. The conception is that there must be no challenges whatsoever to the direction of this raison d’état and its national interest. That is how talk about values and identity become about raison d’état.
Carney’s rendering of democracy is one of passive individuals who have no claims on society. Individuals and collectives are effaced while what are called are given recognition and the interests said to serve these “stakeholders” are validated; collectively aggregated to uphold the legitimacy of Carney’s reasoning of state, for what is called capitalist democracy.
It underscores the important challenge currently facing the working class and people of this country. Among other things, it is important to discuss how Carney’s definition of national interest is used to trump the public interest. There is a process on the basis of which, through sleight of hand, talk about values and identity become about raison d’état (reasoning of the state). Talk about values and identity are used to establish a nation-wrecking definition of national interest. To see through the actions of the Carney government, look at this definition of national interest which discards the legitimate claims of the working class and people on society. By creating all kinds of advisory groups comprised of “stakeholders,” this government is denying the peoples’ right to conscience and to speak, thereby denying the existence of the peoples’ right to self-determination itself.
Carney’s neo-liberal banker’s mindset is stuck in the Covenant Thesis expounded by Thomas Hobbes in the 17th century which defined the Supreme Power above the rule of law. It is stuck in the 18th century philosophy expounded by the Philosophes in France which established the relationship of individuals to the state in pre-revolutionary France to favour a raison d’état and “civilized” rule of law over the “noble savage.” It is also stuck in dogmas rendered by the Vatican and various Popes in the past 80 years to maintain the Catholic Church’s anti-communist and pro-Nazi crusades against the movements of the peoples to empower themselves.
Finally, besides treasuring the “do or die” values of empire espoused by 19th century Victorian England, despite his talk about a “rupture” that the world faces at this time, his government pursues Cold War policies, practices and forms of organization, wrapped in pretentious bafflegab. It ignores that the conditions are no longer those imposed on the world under the auspices of the Anglo-American imperialists with the U.S. leading the way after World War II.
What is called for by the situation, especially amidst all the threats of war, environmental crises and impoverishment of the whole society, is a modern definition of democracy. This does not mean looking up the definition from some dictionary. Definition has to do with the actual functioning and sorting out of the real problems that exist in society as a result of the people’s disempowerment. The sorting out is how one harmonizes the individual and collective interests that are in conflict with one another — the interests of individuals in their collectives, and of the collectives within the ensemble of the general interest. This problem must be argued out. By exercising freedom of speech — speaking freely — modern definitions and the arguments which bring them into being are brought to centre stage.
Human reasoning and arguing have to be brought forward. A logic must be provided that it is possible to sort out the relations which exist and which create a clash between conditions and authority. It requires people having their own agenda, their own organizations, their own outlook, writing their own constitutions which guarantee their rights so that they can resolve problems, and express their own conscience against all the assaults of a state power whose raison d’état is to deprive them of power. It entails finding the ways and means to deprive those in positions of power and privilege of the power to forbid discussion by citing the arrogance that they, not the people themselves, represent what the people want.
A modern definition of democracy is required which is in line with the requirements that are created by the mighty productive forces and the relations that have come from them, which underlie the interests in conflict. This is where the real transition lies which is inherent in the ensemble of relations between humans and humans and humans and nature.
Without blinking an eye, the Carney government’s pursuit of a government run like a boardroom comprised of those who represent narrow supranational private interests suppresses the right to speak of workers and people in this country. Doing so in the name of the national interest, of raison d’état, of high ideals, will not wash. Workers and democratic and anti-war forces from coast to coast to coast are seeing to that.
Toronto, September 20
Sudbury, September 20
Montreal, September 27
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.