With the rise of modern populism, traditional parties just can't win.
Harvard professor Clayton Christensen created the term disruptive technology to describe his observation that companies manufacturing mainframe computers could not switch to making desktop computers, and they ended up losing their market to these lower cost computers.
The main problem was that desktop computers had a completely different market. Mainframe companies were trapped serving their existing customers.
New start-up companies don't have any existing market and so can grow to serve a completely new market. In the case of the desktop computer, the technology improved until it replaced most of the market for mainframes. The new companies became rich and the old companies went bankrupt.
We are seeing similar disruption today in politics. Because of the internet, people are more informed than ever before about politics and political issues. This has created a new market of politically active private individuals.
Until now, politics has been dominated by special interest groups and big businesses. They have supported political parties, and influenced the media in favor of these parties, in exchange for special benefits and privileges which help them make money.
The most striking current example of this is the support of all the traditional federal parties for Supply Management. The dairy lobby even helped Andrew Scheer win the Conservative leadership, when Maxime Bernier, who is opposed to Supply Management, would have won otherwise.
The loss of the Conservative leadership was a blessing in disguise for Maxime Bernier. He was able to start a new party, the People's Party of Canada, unencumbered by the special interest ties of the traditional parties.
Special interest groups are the market for the old parties, and deep ties to this market make it difficult, or impossible, to shift to the new market of the newly active and informed public. Instead we see the old parties doubling down on their crony capitalist corruption, which will only lead to their downfall.
The People's Party is like the desktop computer and the established parties are like the mainframe. It's only a matter of time until the People's Party wins.
(image source, logo added)
Here are the People's Party policies that will help you keep more of your money, earn more money, and preserve and increase the value of your money.
Lowering Government Spending Resulting in Lower Taxes
The People’s Party will eliminate corporate welfare, CBC funding, and foreign development aid. This will save billions of dollars each year, allowing taxes to be reduced to 0% on the first $15,000 of income, 15% on income between $15,000 and $100,000, and 25% on income higher than $100,000.
Reducing Unemployment Through Job Creation in the Private Sector
Eliminating the capital gains tax, and reducing the business tax to 10%, will increase private investment and create jobs. When other political parties talk about creating jobs, they are talking about spending more taxpayer money, increasing taxes now or in the future.
Maintaining the Value of Your Income Through Zero Inflation
Current government policy is to have 2% inflation per year. Maxime Bernier will reduce this to 0% inflation per year so the value of what you earn will never decrease.
Increasing the Value of Your Income Through Increased Productivity
Under the current government, labour productivity has not increased in the past 2 years. By eliminating the carbon tax and approving pipeline construction, the PPC will reduce business costs and increase productivity, resulting in greater purchasing power for all Canadians.
Reducing Consumer Costs
Supply Management in the dairy and poultry industry costs Canadian families $300 to $400 per year. The People’s Party will eliminate Supply Management, resulting in lower costs for dairy, chicken and eggs. The PPC will also open competition in the airline and cell phone industry, resulting in lower cost flights and lower cost cell phone plans.
The other parties will not do any of this because they are working for special interest groups, only the People’s Party is working in the exclusive interest of all Canadians.
The People’s Party policy on limiting immigration is the best policy for the prosperity and well-being of Canadians. It will also benefit underdeveloped countries.
An Incentive to Adopt Modern Values
The vetting of potential immigrants and refugees for modern values and social norms will be an incentive for people in underdeveloped countries to adopt these values and social norms before applying to come to Canada.
Every underdeveloped country has people who share the same modern values that we have in developed countries. These countries also have large parts of their populations that follow primitive traditional values that are incompatible with modern prosperity and well-being.
When we make it known that, to come to Canada, you must share modern values, it will become an incentive for people in underdeveloped countries to adopt these values and social norms. As more people adopt modern values, prosperity will increase and their own countries will become increasingly developed. Incentives to migrate will decline over time.
The Ability and Motivation to Make Life Better
Reduction in the total number of immigrants coming to Canada will also benefit these countries. There has been a “brain drain” of the most motivated and competent people from underdeveloped countries to developed countries. By slowing down this process, these countries will keep more of their most capable people, who will then help to improve their own countries.
With more limited opportunity to migrate, people will also have a greater incentive to fix the problems of their own countries, making them a more desirable place to live and decreasing the incentive to leave.
The End of Harmful Incentives
Finally, our current lack of proper control over immigration contributes to incentives for illegal border crossing at the American southern border, which is where overland migrants must cross to eventually reach Canada. Illegal border crossing causes the accidental death of people attempting to cross dangerous deserts, rivers and oceans. It also forces migrants into the hands of people who swindle, rob, rape and murder in the criminal underworld of people smugglers.
By closing our border to illegal migration and only accepting immigrants and refugees though formal processes after proper vetting, we can ensure that they come to Canada legally and safely. Creating incentives for dangerous illegal migration goes against the respect for human rights and human life that are among Canada’s most cherished values.
I have written previously about the PPC policy to eliminate foreign development aid and how it will benefit underdeveloped counties by creating incentives for reform while no longer subsidizing failure and corruption.
The new People’s Party policy on immigration will also be beneficial to underdeveloped countries by helping them along the path to become better places to live. While here in Canada, better control over immigration will improve the safety of our communities and the prosperity and well-being of all Canadians.
Read Maxime Bernier's speech on Immigration and Multiculturalism.
Header image by: Ninaras
Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives made a strategic decision to move to the political center, based on the reality that right-leaning parties in Canada have an accessible voter base of about 40%. The only way the political right has been able to win is because votes on the left have been split between the Liberals, the NDP, and the Greens.
This has put the Conservatives in a precarious position. Any vote split on the right has been a disaster, and now even winning with a united right is seen as difficult.
With the shift of the Liberals toward the radical left under Trudeau, Scheer saw an opportunity to expand his accessible voter base by shifting toward the center. Unfortunately for him and his Conservative supporters, it looks like that strategy has failed. Even with innumerable missteps by Trudeau, Scheer has not gained back the support that was lost to the Liberals in 2015.
The new People’s Party has done a better job of gaining support from the left, and support from Canadians who are becoming increasingly disillusioned with conventional political parties.
The appeal of the PPC to left-leaning voters comes from the party’s opposition to corporate welfare and supply management. These changes make life less expensive for ordinary Canadians while eliminating the perception of favoring big corporations.
The close relationship of the Conservatives and the Liberals with big business also leads to corruption in our government, which has turned off many Canadians from voting at all. The People’s Party is drawing in support from these non-voters, further widening the PPC’s accessible voter base.
A Twitter poll done by PPC candidate Ian Prittie (based on an earlier poll by Penny Steel which showed similar results) shows that only about half of current PPC supporters voted for the Conservatives in the last election.
A Twitter poll I ran (with an admittedly small sample size) showed that current Conservative supporters are much more likely to have voted Conservative in the last election.
If the PPC ends up having an accessible voter base of 50% or more, the party will have succeeded where the Conservatives failed. Maxime Bernier will have created a party that has broad appeal, and which can potentially win even with a vote split on the right.
Even with this natural advantage, the success of the People's Party will depend on raising public awareness of the party between now and the election, and convincing voters on both the left and right that they have a chance to win.
NGI: Were you active in politics and public service before getting involved with the PPC?
Darik: I first started participating in politics as a teenager. I had a boss at one of my first jobs who was active in municipal politics in my home town of Brantford, and he got me interested in it at an early age. His name is Tim Philp, he was involved in the library then, and today he is involved in things like the city museum. When I was a teenager I helped him start an organization called the Brant Freenet which was one of the very first dial-up internet service providers in Southern Ontario - we helped bring internet to Ontario.
Tim was a member of the Liberal Party. He ran for city council, he helped make a lot of things in that city happen. He helped the library, he helped the museum, he helped the internet infrastructure. Later on in his career he went on to run things like Rosewood house. Tim was very much a role model for me.
NGI: That shaped your view of public service?
Darik: That’s right, it’s about doing good things to make good things happen. And many good things depend on political participation or at least political awareness.
NGI: How did you first hear about the People’s Party and Maxime Bernier?
Darik: I always had a low-level interest in politics. I would always read the news-wire stories. I would always watch what local candidates were doing. I tried to keep involved. And when Maxime broke away from the Conservative Party of Canada, to me it was an interesting news item. And a few guys that I worked with mentioned it, and they were excited about it, and I went and I did some independent research. I read up about what Maxime was about, and I discovered that I align almost perfectly with the things that he cares about and with the policies that he wants for Canada.
NGI: I have been to a few PPC events and you are at most of them.
Darik: That’s right, I’m at almost every PPC event I can get to in Southern Ontario.
NGI: What has made you so committed to volunteering and supporting the party?
Darik: Let me frame this by saying, I spent almost 10 years living and working in the United States. I lived and worked in California and I lived and worked in Texas. So, I have a little bit of perspective about how other places run their business, and when I returned to Canada I had more culture shock coming back to Canada than I did going to the United States. In that, I was shocked at how expensive everything is, I was horrified at housing prices. When I came back to Canada my income went down significantly and my taxes went up astronomically. And I looked into why is this, because I was gone for almost 10 years, why is everything so expensive up here? And it became apparent that there’s a huge amount of waste. So the economics of it were very noticeable to me, and I also noticed a different culture.
Canadians don’t seem to value free speech as much as the Americans do. Living in Texas, free speech is a big deal, and it’s a big deal among regular people, people who are not politically inclined or don’t really care about politics. The same with firearms rights, in Texas in particular, they enjoy their firearms, they use their firearms, they have a natural affirmative right to self-defense. It’s pervasive in their culture, and you become accustomed to it when you live down there. And I noticed it lacking, that kind of civic participation is remarkably lacking, at least in Southern Ontario. And I don’t think that’s a good thing. It’s something I think we can improve.
We can make free speech rights in Canada stronger, and I think that’s a valuable thing. I think free speech in particular is necessary to have the kind of comfortable, compassionate, well integrated, culturally sound place to live in Canada. I think it’s hugely important.
And what follows from that is things like M-103, they do bother me. I look at M-103 and I see, it’s almost like a discount on freedom. It’s chipping away at something that I think is necessary to have civilization.
NGI: For people who don’t know, can you say a bit about M-103?
Darik: M-103 is the government motion that, I’m oversimplifying this to the point of incorrectness, but it’s almost like a secular blasphemy law where you’re not allowed to criticize certain persons, certain groups, or certain religions. And while right now it’s only a motion, and it technically does not apply to us - the general population - government agencies are beginning to implement it. Obviously the government passed it, but also I’m starting to see it overflow into things like the police services, where the police have looked at M-103 and they’re subscribing to it, they are trying to fit it into their day-to-day operations and their general policy.
NGI: You are obviously very dedicated to public service in all aspects. Did you see a stronger civic spirit and sense of public service while living in the United States?
Darik: Yes, absolutely. The Americans that I lived and worked with were unquestionably more outwardly patriotic. I would say that a similar number of Canadians also feel that patriotic spirit. They like living in Canada, they know that Canada is a great country with huge current and future potential. It’s just that one of the cultural differences up here is that people tend to be a little bit more subdued, a little bit more quiet about it. And Canadians seem to be much more responsive to bullying or criticism. There’s fewer people in Canada willing to stand up to people who say bad things about them.
NGI: What do you think can be done to encourage more free speech and more public service in Canada?
Darik: I think we need to get a critical mass of people who are willing to be publicly forward about how they value these things in our culture, in our country, in our civilization. And the PPC is helping to make that happen by holding public events, by holding rallies, by communicating their values. They're showing Canadians that there is a critical mass of people that value the same things that they do, and it’s an encouragement, it does get people out. When we run public events, and when we get really good turnouts, it forms a positive feedback loop.
Early on in the campaign, many of our public events had low turnouts. We frequently got zero or only one mainstream media outlet to cover us at a time. And now, 3 to 4 months out from the general election in October 2019, for example last Friday at the Military Institute, we had a packed house and we had a representative from every major Canadian news outlet in attendance plus two or three from out of market, and that’s huge, and that’s a critical mass, and it’s positive inertia. And the handful of early PPC supporters, that worked hard, that put in the time, that made early events happen, it’s snowballed into something big and positive.
NGI: Since your early experience working with Tim in Brantford you have been engaged in public service, and your experience in the United States contributed to that. And now you are leading by example, you would like to see this change happen in Canada.
Darik: That’s right, and I’m showing up, I’m putting in the time. It’s something that I care about and something I value, it’s something that I want to see. I have children and I do genuinely want to make Canada, now and in the future, a great place for my kids to grow up in. And so, I’ve made a conscious decision to show up and work and make it happen.
NGI: Have you considered becoming a PPC candidate?
Darik: They’ve informally asked. It’s not something I want for myself. But it might be something that I do in order to help the party. So right now, I’d try to say yes. Whenever the PPC asks for help, regardless of where it is, I am bumping other obligations, I am finding the time to help out wherever they need it, wherever they need it most. And I’m doing this in part because this is very definitely a once in a lifetime opportunity.
I don’t think that in my lifetime I will see another party created that aligns so perfectly with what I value. And October is only 3 months away, so why not show up every day and put in 100% and make that happen. Across an entire lifetime this election cycle is just going to be a tiny blip.
NGI: How would you motivate other people to volunteer?
Darik: I would lead by example, a large number of people respond extremely well to leadership by example. Some people respond really well to pep talks, where you just tell them how good it feels to do good work. For me it genuinely feels good to do good things, and get good outcomes, and meet good people, and make new friends and, like I said, to belabour the point, to make good things happen, it feels fantastic.
NGI: Have you had any negative experiences volunteering?
Darik: I have been targeted a few times by social justice warriors, and they are petty, they are mean, they are angry people. And it felt bad to be singled out by people who politically disagree with you. I was singled out in a way that I would never do to another person, it would very much violate my golden rule, the way that I was treated by certain people.
And, I’m over the hump, it doesn't bother me anymore. And for example, I know of EDA members, Electoral District Association volunteers, who from time to time get hate mail or nasty phone calls or are publicly accosted, and it feels bad the first time it happens to you, but after you get over it, it just strengthens your resolve. It doesn’t bother me in the slightest now when I’m canvassing door-to-door and somebody slams the door in my face or is rude to me, because for every one of those people there are 100 or 200 or 300 people who are receptive and will have a meaningful conversation with you.
One of the nice things about the PPC is that it doesn’t have any baggage, it’s a new party, it was formed for arguably really good reasons, it’s got a strong leader, the platform is consistent and well defined and easy to understand and easy to communicate. And I’m finding that, at least compared to prior elections that I have worked on, this is almost easy, because people are so receptive to the message.
When you tell them basic things like the PPC cares about fundamental rights like free speech and freedom of association - they get that. Or when the PPC doesn’t want to send your hard-earned tax money overseas to either foreign national governments or foreign corporations or any corporation at all - people get that. They understand it and it resonates.
NGI: Which PPC event was your most memorable experience?
Darik: The one that sticks out for me was when I met Max for the first time in Etobicoke. That was memorable. It was a really high-energy gathering. It was remarkable in how positive and how packed and how energetic it was compared to anything I had done in the past few years.
And Max is a great guy. He doesn’t have handlers, he engaged the audience, he stayed until everybody got a photo or a selfie, and he’s plain with his answers.
NGI: Which political campaigns did you support before the PPC?
Darik: Some municipal level stuff that wasn’t party affiliated. But almost always provincial Tory or federal Tory.
NGI: How do you feel about the Tory party now, particularly at the federal level?
Darik: I think the phrase LibCon, which is sort of being used as an insult or invective, I think the criticism LibCon is accurate. You can take Andrew Scheer’s own quotes, Andrew Scheer said that the Tories have become a mainstream centrist party. I completely agree. The federal Tories are, in fact, a middle of the road, conflict-averse, mainstream, middle of the road party. And that’s exactly where the federal Liberals were 10 and 20 years ago, and it’s not something that I want, it’s not something I subscribe to.