Pages Menu

Tuesday, April 29, 2025

Editorial: A Minority Win, a Unified Tone, and a Chance to Stabilize Canada

 

 By J. André Faust (April 29, 2025)

🗳 Canada’s 2025 Election: Leadership, Entropy, and the Energy to Hold a Nation Together

Throughout this campaign, I focused on a comparative assessment: academic, experiential, and strategic, between Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre. My focus wasn’t partisan. It was based on a specific and pressing challenge: Donald Trump’s return to the world stage, and what that means for Canada.

Trump’s tariffs and confrontational trade policies didn’t create our economic issues, but they intensified them. Inflation, global supply shocks, labour market shifts. These already made Canada vulnerable. Trump’s return escalates those vulnerabilities into strategic threats. That's why, after months of analysis, I concluded that Carney was best equipped to lead. Not because he's perfect, but because he brings the economic literacy, international credibility, and measured temperament needed to manage this external pressure.

Ironically, the more objectively I evaluated the landscape, the more subjectively committed I became to that outcome. I became biased, not by ideology, but by logic.

I began to see Canada’s challenges through the lens of entropy. In physics, entropy is the drift of systems toward disorder unless energy is invested to maintain structure. In politics, it’s the loss of institutional trust, national cohesion, and civic dialogue. Trump’s policies, and the populist backlash they energize, add fuel to that drift.

Last night’s election offered a narrow reprieve. Carney’s minority win is fragile, not triumphant. But it may be enough to stabilize the system, at least for now.

And in one of the most unexpected turns, the tone shifted.

Poilievre, who fought hard and sharp throughout the campaign, delivered a concession speech that was humble, gracious, and statesmanlike. He acknowledged not only Carney’s victory but also the efforts of the NDP, Bloc, and Greens. That is something rarely seen in this era. He even offered cooperation on the Trump tariff issue, vowing to work constructively while holding the government accountable. At the time, he didn’t yet know he had lost his own seat. A dramatic end to a political chapter, yet he remained composed.

Carney, in turn, offered unity. He reminded Canadians that his mandate is for all of us, regardless of party. Even the Bloc’s leader emphasized national cooperation alongside Quebec's interests. And Jagmeet Singh, after a disappointing result, stepped down with grace.

For one night, entropy was held at bay.

A Personal Note

To all the fellow debaters, analysts, and commenters I’ve interacted with, especially those who supported the Conservative vision, I want to say thank you. Your passion matched my own. You sharpened my thinking, challenged my assumptions, and reminded me how differently each of us is wired.

I never took our differences personally. In fact, I grew to appreciate them.

It is through that clash of ideas, not avoidance or hostility, that a democracy stays alive. You were part of that, and I’m grateful for the exchange.

Let’s carry that spirit into the next chapter. The work isn’t over. But maybe, just maybe, the energy we invest now will keep the system from falling apart.


2 comments:

  1. Although you are as you say a Conservative and I for the most part over the years have voted Liberal including this time I respected and valued your views and analysis. If only more people within the Conservative Party would have elevated the debate to the level you did. Sadly I am still seeing hateful flags and comments from people who say the are Conservatives. I hope people like you within your party will address this going forward

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your kind words, I really appreciate them. Just to clarify, I’m not tied to any one party (so the “Conservative” label may have been a case of mistaken identity… happens to the best of us! 🙂). At election time, the challenge for me is distinguishing between reality and rhetoric and recognizing the limits of what any party can actually deliver. In Canada, that also means keeping in mind the differences between federal and provincial responsibilities.
      In my writing and analysis, I do my best to stay as objective as possible, even if complete objectivity is never fully possible. I’m glad to hear that you’ve found value in that approach. Your comment encourages me to keep at it.

      Delete