It is becoming increasingly clear that the newly-elected Liberal government, under the leadership of Mark Carney, intends to govern the country along all too familiar neoliberal lines. The prime minister’s promises to deliver a 15 per cent cut in the federal budget by 2029 as well as an aggressive deregulatory agenda and tax cuts primarily benefitting the affluent moved the Globe and Mail to declare that “Brian Mulroney could have endorsed it.”
While the government has tried to downplay the size of the cuts by insisting they will be delivered painlessly through attrition and efficiencies, it is becoming apparent that these cuts will dramatically impact public service delivery to Canadians. As CCPA Senior Economist David Macdonald observes,
For cuts this is deep, it would require across-the-board job losses and major service reductions. In other words, if it proceeded it would represent a major disruption to federal public services and would rival the 18.9 per cent cut in operation expenditures of Paul Martin’s 1995 budget as the most extreme budget slashing in Canadian history.
These cuts will dramatically impact federal department transfers to provinces and municipalities in vital areas like disaster assistance, housing and infrastructure, workforce training and catastrophic drug coverage, not to mention eliminate thousands of public sector jobs. And as Angella Macewen reminds us, none of this was in the Liberal election platform that they campaigned—and won—on.
A lot of Canadians viewed the last election as an existential fight against the kind of authoritarian populism represented by Donald Trump in a Canadian guise. As Frank Graves and Jeff Smith describe it, authoritarian, or “ordered” populism “emphasizes obedience, hostility toward outgroups, a desire to turn back the clock to a time of greater order in society, and a search for a strongman type to lead the return to a better time.” As Graves and Smith explain, the “ordered populist” outlook ”is more closely aligned with Canadians whose political sympathies lie with conservative political parties.”
Fears of the Conservative’s affinities with Trumpism no doubt led to the dramatic reversal of Liberal fortunes during the election, as Canadians that traditionally support more social democratic policies via the NDP were convinced to park their votes with Carney given the stakes. Canadians rejected the Conservatives at the polls this time, but the more concerning question is how to ensure that the spectre of authoritarian populism does not threaten to come so close to power again.
Carney’s preference for neoliberal austerity is the worst possible response to this question. The rise of authoritarian populism throughout the world is a direct consequence of decades of neoliberal policies. Neoliberalism’s focus on disciplining workers by gutting labour rights, disempowering unions and defunding social programs, while simultaneously freeing capital through de-regulation, lower taxation and enshrining investor rights through free trade agreements has led to growing economic inequality as workers wages stagnate and wealth concentrates among the wealthiest one per cent.
The growth of inequality in a society results in a host of morbid symptoms, eroding social cohesion, increased political polarization, declining trust in institutions and loss of social mobility. The resentment, status anxiety and reduced trust created by neoliberal economic conditions have been channelled by cynical right-wing populists towards a host of imaginary enemies – from immigrants and refugees, to journalists and universities, to queer students, and teachers in public schools. Regardless of the target, authoritarian populism thrives on the desperation, uncertainty and helplessness generated by unequal economic conditions. Carney’s program will only exacerbate these trends.
Recent research demonstrates that austerity increases support in economically vulnerable regions for right-wing populist parties. As one study concludes, “our results suggest that the success of populist parties hinges on the government’s failure to protect the losers of structural economic change.”
This new Liberal government’s program of enforced austerity is a gift to Canada’s authoritarian populists. It will only provide more fuel for the grievances that fire the authoritarian populist furnace. By cynically emulating so many of the Conservative’s preferred policies in regards to public sector cuts, immigration, tax cuts for the wealthy, and militarism, the Liberals are effectively validating parts of the authoritarian populist worldview, making these policies look less distasteful to some Canadians.
All of this conspires to create the conditions to make authoritarian populism an even more attractive option for many Canadians in the next election. If the federal government continues to pursue this path, they will be remembered less as a bulwark against authoritarian populism, but more as its midwife.