Speaker 1: This podcast is supported by the Real Reel. Meet Christine.
She loves shopping and this, this is the sound of
fashion overload, too many fabulous things, not enough space. So
Christine started selling with the Real Reel.
Speaker 2: I've always loved collecting designer pieces, Gucci bags, prod of heels,
but my style keeps evolving. Selling with the Real Reel
game changer.
Speaker 1: I earn more and they do everything seriously. Just drop
off your items, our schedule a pickup. We handle the photos, descriptions, pricing,
even shipping. You just sit back and watch your items
sell fast to our forty million members.
Speaker 2: And I get peace of mind knowing I earn more
selling with the Real Reel than anywhere else.
Speaker 1: Exactly this, that's the sound of your closet working for you.
The Real Reel earn more, save time, sell fast, and
right now you can get an extra one hundred dollars
to shop when you sell for the first time. Go
to the Realreel dot com to get your extra hundred dollars.
The Realreal dot Com. That's the realreal dot com.
Speaker 2: Mana a live man like this man letting butterfly, flapping
his wing, dig down in a forest. Man. It gonna
cause a tree fall.
Speaker 1: Letting five thousand miles away. Man, nobody seen, nobody.
Speaker 3: See you don't even know, man, you don't they like
you followed at a little story and you got directed
like that.
Speaker 1: That's man, Man, don't like a dang on the panel,
man matter?
Speaker 2: Man? All right, Daniel, welcome to Jay Burdens Show.
Speaker 3: How you doing, Man, I'm doing great things for inviting me.
Speaker 2: Yeah, man, I'm really excited to have you on. I
was sort of vaguely aware of your product or of
your project rather, but it wasn't until I think someone
tagged us both on Twitter that you know, we got connected.
So if you could for my audience, could you describe, well,
who are you, who you are and what do you do?
Speaker 4: Yeah, my name is Daniel Tiree. I'm the founder and
chairman of the Dominion Society. We're a new kind of
not for profit organization. We call ourselves a vanguard political movement.
So we're a kind of third party organization that advocates
for what we call on behalf of what we call
heritage Canadians and specifically for a concept called remigration. So
this would be the reversal of kind of policies that
have created this mass immigration crisis that's hurting the Canadian
people and undermining our identity. So we look to reverse
the kind of trends of those immigration policies in order
to preserve those things.
Speaker 2: So two things, I'm pretty sure my audience will be
familiar with the concept of heritage Americans. But first, well, one,
what is a heritage Canadian? And two, can you, I
guess contextualize what does mass migration in Canada look like?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 4: Yeah, so, I mean the concept would be very similar.
A heritage Canadian or is a descendant of the original
kind of settlers of Canada. We draw the distinction between
kind of modern economic immigrants and the previous generations of settlers.
I think there's something fundamentally different than some between someone
who comes to a hostile wilderness who risks life and
limb across open oceans in order to carve civilization from nothing,
versus modern economic economic immigrants who come here to take
advantage of our wealth and opportunity, to leach off of
our social assistance and so on. So we draw that distinction.
So a heritage Canadian is exactly that descendant of the
original settlers, and mass immigration has become a crazy issue
across the Western world, but Canada is definitely one of
the top, one of the most radical examples of it.
Kind of white Canadians are becoming a minority in our
in our own homelands, probably as soon as twenty thirty
twenty thirty five as a result of these radical policies.
So we've seen kind of increasing in immigration trends since
about the late nineteen eighties, started under under Prime Minister
Brian mulrooney, and really kind of reached an unprecedented scale
under our previous Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, where immigration figures
got up too close to above a million people per
year when you factor in temporary residence like foreign workers
and foreign students in these classes who who will often
kind of find reason to stay or get on permanent
tracks for residency as well. So this was you know,
a huge fraction of our population, and almost in our
entire population growth was through immigration. About ninety eight percent
of all population growth in Canada has been through immigration.
In much of the population growth, the domestic kind of
birth rate has been to you know, second third generation immigrants.
So we're seeing our are kind of founding stock get
pushed to the fringes and all the while we see
our politicians kind of continue to advocate for immigration and
to start playing dress up and pander to foreign ethnic blocks,
which has been kind of corrosive to our politics writ large.
So there's been a huge backlash against this. A majority
of Canadians to the tune of over sixty percent, even
a majority of immigrants are turning against kind of mass
immigration policies in Canada. But it's kind of the zeitgeist
to be like, so, how do we kind of deal
with the consequences instead of actually solving the problem. And
really what we put forward is what we think is
the true solution, which is reversing the flow and sending
a lot of people back instead of just kind of
trying to figure out how to live together.
Speaker 2: So I'm going to ask what's called a leading question. Surely, right,
the center right, you know, the people interested in conserving
your nation are on side. Right, Surely the kind of
good you know, center right figures are are an alliance
with you? Is that the case?
Speaker 3: Daniel, No, No, no, unfortunately not.
Speaker 4: In fact, our main center right party, the Conservative Party,
is is very much like just as much to blame
as the center left Party the Liberals, like if you
look back at our history, like these kind of policies
were started by the Liberals who brought in kind of
multiculturalism and liberalized our immigration system, took a lot of
the kind of ethnic and country based policies out of
our official immigration policies. But the kind of conservatives jumped
on the same boat.
Speaker 3: Like it.
Speaker 4: It was a conservative prime minister Brian mulroney in the
in the eighties that took us off of our kind
of economic based immigration system where we'd turn on the
taps when the economy was bad, or when the economy
was bad, we turned off the taps, and when the
economy was hot, we turned on the taps. He changed
it to a flat figure, which has just increased and
increased and increase since then. And then Stephen Harper, our
most recent conservative prime minister, similarly, he continued to increase immigration.
He massively increased temporary residents as well, and most troubling,
he kind of shifted our main sources of immigration of
immigration in terms of countries from the United States and
the British Isles and so on, countries that are more ethnically, linguistically,
culturally similar to Canada to countries that are much more
distant from US. Now under Stephen Harper and continues to
this day, the main source of immigration between became the Philippines, China,
and India, countries that are very very different from Canada.
So the Conservatives have played a very big role in immigration,
in the changes to our immigration system, and then even
to this day they prefer to kind of go with
the flow instead of pushing back. They similar to the Liberals.
They're playing dress up, they're pandering to ethnic bloating blocks,
they're promising to increase the numbers. Until very recently, in
the last year, we've seen a shift in tune for
both parties to in line with kind of public opinion.
But up until now they've all been kind of singing
from the same song sheet, and we just don't think
this is acceptable. Like, the Conservatives are very much conservative
in name only. They stand for you know, free markets,
free free trade, smaller government. None of these things are
really ostensibly conservative. They're this kind of Reaganite tradition where
this the right kind of where liberalism kind of won
the day and both parties started representing this kind of
same neoliberal kind of ideology just like you see in
the States. What we're calling for is a more true
sense of conservatism. I don't think you can really honestly
call yourself conservative if you don't stand against this radical
social change that's happening in our society. So actually last
week it was our Conservative Parties convention here in Canada
and out in Calgary, and myself and my organization where
it went there to kind of host a demonstration and
kind of put this into the central spotlight. We had
a demonstation right outside their convention where we ask the
question conserve what to kind of point out that really
what they stand for is not conservative in any way.
In this and demographic change, mass immigration needs to be
the central focus really for all parties, but especially for
an a sensibly conservative one.
Speaker 2: So oftentimes when discussing immigration, when discussing remigration, you get
this sort of canard, right, it's only these kind of old,
bitter racist hangars on who are concerned about immigration. I
think that is changing across the anglosphere, certainly in America.
So I'm curious, like if you could one what is
the youth sentiment around this issue? And two what are
the demographics of your organization, Like you know who is
the average supporter.
Speaker 4: Yeah, No, I think that's a false narrative. I think
the remigration around the world has been a very youthful movement.
Our generation has really kind of grown up completely within
this multicultural kind of liberal society, and it's it's very
obvious to us how dysfunctional it has been from a
cultural standpoint, from an economic standpoint, and younger people just
don't have these same kind of allegiances to old party brands.
Speaker 3: They don't they they they don't, they're not.
Speaker 4: They don't feel kind of saddled with the same baggage
that older generations do when it comes to maybe more
a liberal or maybe a statist kind of solutions to
these problems. So I do think it's a very youthful movement.
People are really looking for an alternative and something to
give them hope because really, like people like myself, people
of my generation have kind of given up hope on
even the simple standards of yesterday, like being able to
start a family young and own a house and all
these things, and everything gets tied back to mass immigration.
So I do think it's a very youthful movement. That
being said, like there is definitely in our organization. We
have actually a pretty even kind of demographic pyramid across
the age kind of spectrum. It is a bit skewed younger,
but like the majority of our support is kind of
between twenty five and forty five. I would say I
haven't crunched the numbers super recent.
Speaker 3: Not at all.
Speaker 2: I was looking for a specific answer. So building on
that point, I did something really stupid. I got into
a debate with a Canadian socialist. Sorry it was inadvisable, right,
but you know, relatively cordial. And one of the areas
that we disagreed on was the fact that, you know,
multiculturalism isn't working. And it's funny because I actually mentioned
I cited a source from your nation.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 2: A friend of mine, I won't say which one, has
been on my show before, and he was talking about
how his daughter was unable to get a sort of
normal teenager job, right, the sort of job you do
before you move out, just to get some work experience,
to get some pocket money, a couple hours a week.
And she was describing, or through her dat I guess,
describing how things like you know, fast food restaurants and
gas stations that traditionally employed teenagers have basically been turned
into ethnic rackets where if you're not a member of
XYZ group you need not apply. And he was describing
how his daughter had sort of gone through that process,
that she started working at this service station with other
local teenagers and then over the course of several months,
was effectively replaced in real time. So one, again maybe
this is another softball question, but is multiculturalism working in Canada?
And two, if it isn't, how is it affecting normal
people's lives.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean that's a very pertinent example. I don't
even know if that's a direct criticism of multiculturalism. It's
really just the standards for economic migration in Canada. And
this is something that started under a conservative Prime minister
by Stephen Harper, this massive expansion of the temporary foreign
worker program which was which was again increased under the
subsequent Liberal governments. They started bringing in more and more
temporary foreign workers, but also pivoting the kind of jobs
that they were worked for. So originally, when the temporary
foreign worker program was brought in, it was it was
for agricultural agricultural work. It was for seasonal, very seasonal
employment like at harvest season, we get some more laborers
to come over to pick strawberries or whatever. But this
morphed under Stephen Harper into a completely different style of
program where it was diversified for not only like very
niche labor, but also for things like working at gas
stations and fast food restaurants and so on. So, as
you pointed out, like these typically these types of simple
low skilled jobs do have an important part in the
kind of broader labor market because they provide opportunity for
seniors and younger people to get that kind of job experience,
which can then lead to further opportunities down the line. Instead,
now these are being shipped off to temporary foreign workers
from India and other countries, which has these knock on
effects down the line because you kind of stunt the
kind of growth for the younger generation. But it's also
has been turned into a sort of racket. These kind
of immigrants are kind of clearly using specifically chain restaurants,
chain restaurants and gas stations stuff like this. They get
one franchise and they get more multiple franchise and then
they use them to hire their their family members and
friends from foreign countries to get them on that kind
of pathway from temporary residency to permanent residency because it
is streamlined, because a st simply those people should be
able to to get they get priority because they we
believe that they can assimilate better that way, which is
which is obviously false. So literally you can go anywhere
and Canada. You can go to the whitest town in
the middle of nowhere, and the subway or the gas
station or or whatnot is still going to be run
by the one kind of Indian family in that entire city.
I worked on an election campaign in twenty twenty three
and I was in a small city in Manitoba, literally Altona,
a town of a few thousand people, and it was
like one of the most red pilling moments to go
into the subway and it's like still there, it's run
by Indians. It's unbelievable. It's one thing when you're in
a big city, but like literally anywhere in this country,
that's just the reality of the situation. The broader problems
with multiculturalism is since since the seventies the eighties, very
much we we as a country, we kind of rejected
the idea of assimilation. There's often drawn the comparison between
Canada and the US, where the US is described as
a melting pot, in Canada's described as as a cultural mosaic.
This is one of those things that Canadians are often
like pompous about how we're so much superior to the
US because we don't force people to merge into society.
But obviously this ends up being dysfunctional. You need to
have a sort of cohesive identity and culture in order
to have a functional society, and we kind of stuck
our nose up at that, and they're like, no, you
can maintain your foreign languages, your foreign cultures and so on.
And when you pair this with mass immigration, especially with
huge numbers from just a few countries, what results is
ethnic ghettos. Now you have cities like Brampton and Surrey
in northern Calgary where the population is seventy eighty percent Indian.
You'll have children that are born in Canada to like
two Indian parents. They'll go to school in an eighty
percent Indian school, They'll be able to speak foreign languages.
They're they're putting up giant statues of foreign gods and
so on. Like this, there's small pockets of India existing
in Canada, and I think that's fundamentally wrong. I think
Canada should be Canada and India should be India. I
don't think that's a that's really a hot take at
the end of the day.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean well, and I think that I'm glad
you brought up the sort of relationship between America and
Canada because one of the things that sort of struck
me is that for a certain faction of the Canadian population,
in the Canadian ruling elite, they don't exist as an
actual country. They exist in relation to America. So it's
sort of this this relationship where well, Canada needs to
be almost more American than America, right, like, oh, you
know the evil you know, red state chuts. They're not
living up to these great values, so we'll do it better.
And so you get this sort of backwards relationship. And
Justo was probably the worst about this, where you'd almost
spend more time talking about my politics than yours, and
you're like, wait, aren't you that ostensibly the head of
an actual country? And I'm not making that criticism of you.
I'm making that criticism of your politicians, of course, but
it is that it's sort of bizarre relationship right where
it's sort of like, this is a nation with issues.
One of the things that I know your country has
been hit by mine as well as you know, an
explosion of you know, cost of living and housing prices.
The fact that there are one million new Canadians every
year I assume has nothing to do with that. But
could you speak to that sort of misplaced focus, right
if you could just explain what problems are facing Canada
and does anyone seem to be interested in actually addressing.
Speaker 4: Well, well, just to talk about our political identity, I
do think it has been kind of become very superficial,
especially in the kind of post war period. But ultimately
Canadian identity is relational to the United States, like our
founding mythology is very much a rejection of Americanism, in liberalism.
That's why we decided to be a country, and we're
not all one kind of union like the Revolutionary War.
While it is kind of America's founding mytho, it also
is tied up in Canada's identity because especially the Anglo
Canadian population is very much like this. The American Revolutionary
War was sort of a selection event for Canada, where
the kind of liberal folks decided to form America, and
the people who literally fought against that right on the
side of the British. They were then ostracized and moved
up to Canada to what was would become Upper Canada
and subsequently Ontario. So a significantly part part of our
kind of Anglo founding stock were loyalists to the crown,
people who rejected the American experiment of radical liberalism in
favor of a more traditional, orderly society. So the American
kind of mythos is captured by that, you know, the
phrase from the Constitution. Their life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness are kind of equivalent to that is, peace,
order and good governance. So Canada is actually like a
reactionary conservative state in rejection of American ideas. Now, in
the post war period, American liberalism kind of won the
day as America ascended to the global hedgemon right through
soft power through hard power, they dominated the world. But
this kind of affected Canada doubly like we had a
kind of multiplier effect due to our close geographic relationship.
So in the pre war period we were very much
a vassal state of the British, like you were saying,
how we're kind of more American than the Americans. Before
the World War, Kenda was widely seen as more British
than the British. So as the British kind of waned
as the global superpower and were replaced by the Americans,
that hit us doubly because we have such a close
economic tie, so we kind of replaced Britain with America,
which was very much against our founding ethos. Nationalists like
myself up north of the border often say that we're
kind of illiberal hardware running liberal software now, so you
end up with this weird kind of contradiction where Canadians
are very anti American kind of reflexively. We saw this
very much over the last year during our election campaign,
where our entire federal election just became about this like
super official rejection of Americanism. Well, we've completely kind of
adopted American ideas, So like Canadian identity is often reduced
to like we're Americans but with free healthcare, We're Americans
but more polite, when like really it's like, no, we
are a complete rejection of what America is. We are
people that prioritize order over liberty. We have these very
different founding ideals, but that's been kind of lost away,
and we're left with this kind of surface level nonsense
where it's very confusing.
Speaker 3: People don't know why we're not American anymore.
Speaker 2: Well, and I think that that's sort of an interesting
relationship because it's kind of funny that that anti Americanism
is ultimately an extension of the kind of true like
civic religion of America. Because of course, right, you've mentioned
the initial founding myth, right, the you know, the kind
of American founding fathers, the Revolutionary War, and that was
the founding myth for a certain version of the American republic. Right,
like we we basically have the same thing the French
do with like the numbered republics. We don't do it officially,
but like, let's be honest, Thomas Jefferson would be absolutely
horrified at what Lincoln did, let alone what FDR did. Right,
They're they're completely different nations. And so, you know, the
post war era, the narrative of you know, the American
Empire has been this sort of like liberationist guilt, this
idea that you know, we simultaneously must hate and despise
ourselves for what we were. And also this sort of
you know, not to use that a weighted term, but
this sort of like you know, liberationist idea about you know,
the point of your life is to have the maximal
number of people experiencing the maximal freedom for self expression,
which is basically defined as like, you know, a certain
number of like firing of your serotonin, uh, you know,
receptors in your brain or whatever. And so it's funny
to me that either the anti americanism is actually effectively
the ideology of the US State Department, if you really
drill down to it, like it's the same thing that,
let's be honest, the majority of our politicians, right that
the kind of left which is, you know, the hegemonic
force in American politics. It's what they say. And again
when I say this, like, don't take this as a
criticism of Canada, I think you were much better off,
you know, pre war for any number of reasons. But
I do see that and kind of chuckle at it.
You see the same thing with like certain you know,
progressive globalist types out of Europe as well, where it's
like you, in a weird way, you're almost more captured
than anything else, right, because you still exist in relation
to this nation you proclaim to hate, and weirdly enough,
you have the same opinion as every major institution in
that country, right, you have the same opinions as Harvard,
as the Washington Post is whatever. So in a weird way,
it's like you kind of you personally. Of course, that
person is sort of the perfect imperial citizen, which I
find to be a certain bit of irony there, but
I'll kick it back to you, Daniel.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, no, I definitely see that hypocrisy everywhere that
people like. It's it's quite ironic that the kind of
right leaning, kind of hierarchical traditionalist types have really become
the counterculture in the modern zeitgeist, whereas you see these
like blue haired punks or whatever, and they they've become
the kind of real, the real foot soldiers of the elite.
It's it does seem very backwards, but we live in
very strange times. So we often say like that Canadians
are not a revolutionary people. We were not formed in revolution.
We were actually formed as a sort of counter revolution
to what was going south of the border. So as
nationalists in Canada, we don't really preach revolution as as
many kind of dissident types are inclined to. What we
really preach is as a counter revolution. We we point
to what happened under specifically Pierre Trudeau, to transform our society,
to replace our constitution, to impose multiculturalism. We see this
as the real revolution in Canada. And what we're standing
is for a counter revolution and a reversal of a
lot of these policies. That's why people like myself we
we fly, we fly the old flag, we we we
use our old symbols. What we're not what we're preaching,
while it is a transformation of our society it is,
it is really not something new. It's it's really a
return to tradition, which I think is much more consistent
with Canada's kind of founding ethos, rather than than preaching
American style revolution, which is a lot of what you
see from the more like slopulist types in Canada who
very much are captured by the kind of American media
ecosystem online and stuff, and don't really think for themselves
or don't really understand our unique history. They just kind
of latch onto what's popular.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I'm glad, I'm glad you brought that up,
because I see that sort of across the world, and
some of it's branding right where it's like, oh, you know,
Bolscenaro is Brazil's Trump, or you know, Victor Orbon is
Hungary's Trump, and it's sort of like that framing is
imposed on every nation across the world, and viewers of
my show, well, no, I have certain criticisms of the
current administration. We don't need to get into those, but
I do think that's sort of an interesting thing as well, right,
that there's sort of a diversion valve.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 2: I don't know if it's deliberately constructed or not, but
this sort of rebellion which in a weird way ends
up reinforce the central premits right, reinforcing that everything must
be done in relation to this other nation's capital. And look,
I say that as you know an American nationalists, which
I realize is a bizarre position to be in for
any number of reasons. But you know, when I look
to Canada and I see that sort of sloppulist, right,
I see that desire to sort of create your own Trump,
I'm like, no, no, no, no, this is not that's
not what you are. That would setting aside the question
of how efficacious or possible that would be doing. You know,
the Maga movement in Canada is ultimately accomplishing the same end,
which is, well, then it's not Canada anymore. And look like,
I don't pretend to, you know, deeply understand your culture.
I find it to be honest, slightly confusing, but nonetheless right.
It ought to exist, you know, none aside from anything else.
Speaker 4: Yeah, no, And I that's kind of why the kind
of a fundamental problem that the right has been having
in Canada for a long time. They've been too aligned
with the Americans, which is kind of very counter to
what Canada is. And while we have become very Americanized,
very liberalized, there is still that kind of anti American
instinct and that really is what's sunk the Conservative Party
in the last election. They were seen as too soft
on America. Pierre pauliev Or, the leader of the Conservative Party,
was seen as kind of Canadace Trump. A lot of
the slopulists want to kind of steer into that swerve,
but the reality is that's really not popular in the
general Canadian public. There's that reflex of anti Americanism that
really swung the election for the for the Liberal Party.
So while there is that kind of inkling for a
lot of people who are completely captured by America, like
a lot of these swapulists, they love Trump, they love
they want Canadace Trump that many of them are like
fifty first staters and so on. But that's just not
that's like, it's not a viable path to victory in
Canadian politics. Really, what we need is an authentically Canadian movement,
and a lot of what that would be has been
so lost because we've been so captured by the American
kind of ecosystem in a lot of different ways, directly
and indirectly through hard power through soft power over the
last you know, a sixty eighty years, like really since
the late sixties. So people like me, we've completely lived
our entire lives within this kind of political capture. But
it's up to people like myself and many other dissidents
and nationalists to kind of promote what really makes us
Canadian and to provide that authentic path. And we hope
that through our aim is through that through this kind
of meta political pressure, through changing the mainstream ideas, through
shifting the conversationation that we'll see that change reflected in
public opinion and some subsequently through the through our existing
political parties, and we we do find that it's catching
on really fast, even though we we have limited kind
of institutional power, even though we have like where we're
not covered by the mainstream media, even though we're starting
very organically and small on social media. Ultimately, the what
the message we preach is is consistent with Canadian's identity.
It's constant, consistent with that sort of instinctual blood memory
that exists within the prototypical Canadian. So we've been really
exploding really fast as a result of that, because we
understand what can is more than mainstream institutions, more than
these kind of slopulists. So people want to shut us down,
people don't want to give us that that uh, that
that coverage, but ultimately will continue to grow because we're
we're on the right track.
Speaker 2: This is it's always interesting to me because there's this
kind and I don't know if anyone ever expresses it
like this, but there's this sort of view of nationalism
that I think is ultimately very I don't want to
say dishonest, but I think it's very naive, which is
the idea that you know, like nationalism is like a
block in the same way that globalism is. And you
can be, you know, a nationalist of your country and
you know, perfectly in line with you know, every other
nationalist across the world. And obviously, look like you and
I and you know, our friends in England or South
Africa or Australia are co belligerents, right, we're pulling the
same direction. But ultimately, like and you know, I'm never
going to be in a position to make this decision,
But if there were that hypothetical decision, right, which would
you know, advance America at the cost of Canada. It's like, well,
that's what it is, right to be a nationalist, to
choose your people above others. And so you know, when
I hear you you're talking about, you know, the need
to kind of decouple your country from America. To me,
that's entirely rational, right, it's for your people, right abo
above others. And look like, let's be honest, it's very
unlikely that that will be some kind of like hot
war between the new nations. It's the most ridiculous to say,
but there is something to be said for the fact that,
like there are difficult decisions and there are zero some
games individually, and I think it's very easy, as you know,
a nationalist of your nation to immediately recoil and say like,
oh no, like why would you do that? You must
be this horrible person. It's like, well, no, he is
just an advocate for his people above all others, which
you know is really what we would hope and expect
from you know, other nations, other cultures. Just a brief aside,
there is something I get, I guess a little frustrated about,
but I.
Speaker 4: Think it's much more honest interpretation of how power should function. Though,
Like we've been living in this kind of subversive kind
of rules based international order in the post war period
where people kind of subvert their national interest as especially
the dominant powers, as some sort of fair liberal attitude,
where in the reality it's really just been an extension
of the power for the United States, less so China
and Russia, who maintained disproportionate power either through kind of
the UN Security Council or whatnot. Really it's just the
US bullying people around, not some kind of liberal, fair
egalitarian system. So it's been this really dishonest thing, and
I think we're seeing a kind of crumbling of that.
Trump is representative of that. And we even had our
Prime minister at Davos the other week, you know, proclaim
and end to the or to declare a new world order.
Last night we had our former prime minister, or two
nights ago we had our former Prime minister Stephen Harper
declared that we're in an age of nationalism, and I
do think they're both correct. I do think we're in
this transition period, specifically moving away from the age of
complete American dominance, transitioning from this kind of unipolar power
dynamic and geopolitics towards a more multipolar, bipolar system. And
I think it's natural for a shift to nationalism for
all the middle powers to occur as a response to that.
In this more kind of chaotic system, everyone has to
be a bit more self interested. So we're seeing that
collapse of the lie that was liberalism in real time.
And I think this shift towards back towards nationalism is
both inevitable and for the interest of everyone. And yes,
sometimes we'll run counter to things, but I do think
there is still a there is still space for you know,
global alignment within a more nationalist system. There are countries,
like you just pointed out, that we share a lot,
We share history, we share culture and ethnicity, especially within
the anglosphere Canada, United States, Australia, Great Britain, New Zealand,
so on. And I can see these countries working together
for similar goals, Like I have some proposals on things
like reforming the asylum system, and really all these countries
are going through very similar problems, and I think we
could work together to find solutions that help all of
us while being consistent with.
Speaker 3: All of our our national interests.
Speaker 4: Even if you know, some things like trade and military
arrangements and stuff like this we might have to butt heads.
I think there is still space for kind of global
alignment on certain things.
Speaker 2: No, certainly, and I really said that to sort of address,
let's be honest, just a straw man of an idea.
You see from time to time. One of the things
that I have heard from my Canadian friends, and this
is the definition of anecdotal Some guy told me once,
so you know, take that for what it's worth. But
he was talking about the issue us with kind of
like resource extraction and how that is sort of a
dividing line in Canadian politics, and so I'm curious right
on that issue, assuming we are pivoting back towards this
kind of era of nationalism, like what becomes of the
kind of like beating heart of Canada, whether that's industry
or you know, resource extraction, because seemingly from the outside
looking in, the Liberal government doesn't seem to like that, right,
They don't seem to like to be blunt about it
things being made and actually done in Canada, And so
I realized it's a slight departure, but I'm curious to
get your your thought on that, because again, there is
also the kind of specter of China in this, right,
They're a major resource producer, they, as you've said, sent
quite a lot of immigrants there. So that's a very
vague collection of ideas with a question kind of depended
on to the end. But I'm curious to get your
thoughts there.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, so far this kind of shift towards
a more nationalist perspective has been a lot of talk
and not a lot of action. So particularly Mark Karney,
since he took over as the leader of the Liberal
Party last.
Speaker 3: Year, he has been.
Speaker 4: Much more traditionalist in his messaging, like he has been
talking about how we are a union of the three
founding people's British, French and First nations. He's been a
lot more eager to talk about our history. The first
thing he did once he took over as leader was
visit the king in our king in the United Kingdom
to visit France instead of going to visit the United States.
Like there was a very clear pivot back towards a
more historical ethos. Not to mention his speechs at Davos
and such, but right after Davos, he came back to
Quebec City, the oldest part of our country, and he
did his speech where the first ten minutes was all
about our roots and our history in this and then
he kind of pitches the same kind of post national
Lester Pearson era multiculturalist kind of messaging. It's a very
you know, post nationalist, civic nationalist message dressed up in nationalism.
The Trudeau administration before him was very anti resource and
you would expect Mark Carney to be pushing much faster
on that in the on the development of those resources. Specifically,
we need pipelines going from Alberta, where most of our
oil and natural gases out to both coasts of the
country in order to facilitate international trade. Right now, we
just have pipelines down to the United States, so we
can't even refine our own products. We we set it
sell it out of a massive discount to you guys. Uh,
But there's been no significant push for this. There's still
this kind of ideological opposition to fossil fuels, you know,
the whole climate change narrative and so on. So a
real national as government would do what's in the best
interests of Canadians and develop our ret natural resources to
bring wealth to our people. So we have seen this
kind of surface level adjustment, but there's a long way
to go in order to actually do what's in the
best interests of our people.
Speaker 2: Well, fair enough, man, I'm curious, like you said, your
organization is growing very quickly. What are your goals, what
do you what are you aiming towards, what are you
guys doing And you know, if people are interested, where
can they join?
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, we have been going very fast. We were
just launched in July of last year. We've had we've
had liver coverage. We started growing from Stratch and we
already have almost twenty five hundred members across the country.
Speaker 3: Those are paying members.
Speaker 4: Our social medias have blown up where we have you know,
over thirty thousand followers on Facebook or almost thirty thousand
on Twitter and Instagram. We're getting millions of kind of
impressions on a monthly basis across our social media channels. Really,
our approach to things is metapolitical. We see that politics
is downstream from culture, and as such we aim to
influence Canada's political culture in order to shift the direction
of all major political parties and institutions. So we do
this through kind of four main pathways. We do it
through our kind of media content online. We do it
through grassroots activism. We're building a network of kind local
chapters across the country to engage in classical grassroots politics,
putting up posters, distributing flyers, hosting local gatherings and demonstrations.
We also take a more kind of think tank approach,
what we call intellectual development. We're putting out a series
of kind of white papers throughout this year to expand
on our ideas in a way in a kind of
language that speaks towards these traditional institutions, governments and political
parties and so on, so they can start to adapt
our ideas as we popularize them more efficiently. And then
the last year is what we call institutional infiltration. We're
looking to get our guys involved in political parties, in
existing institutions and government jobs and so on in order
to create this network of kind of institutional nationalists at
all levels, so that as the power balance shifts back
towards nationalists, will have people well positioned across the country
in order to completely exert our kind of power and
influence on society. So those are kind of four main pathways.
If people are interested in getting more involved, they can
check out our website, Dominion Society dot ca. You can
find out more about our ideas there and you can
even sign up as a member or make a small
donation in order to help us continue to grow and
influence the kind of political scene here in Canada.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Thanks man, this has been a really interesting conversation.
Speaker 3: I am.
Speaker 2: I'm very glad that your organization exists, because, like I said,
I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on
Canadian culture. I've been there a number of times, but
you know when I saw the exit of your government
during the past five years. I'll leave it at that.
Not to say words I can't on social media, but
it was incredibly upsetting right that you know a people
who is you're not the same but sort of cousins right, geographically, culturally,
very much genetically from the same people, under this kind
of petty tyranny. It genuinely morally offended me. Right, it
didn't seem right. And so you know, godspeed on your project.
I think you guys are doing very good work and
I'm excited to see you guys grow. But yeah, Daddiel,
this has been a ton of fun. Man, Thank you
so much for coming on.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, thanks for having me on. It was a
really fun conversation.
Speaker 2: Likewise, as far as my stuff, the Jay Burton Show, Apple, Spotify, YouTube,
anywhere you listen to podcasts. Now, this is what I do.
If you want to support me, you can throw me
a few bucks a month on Patreon, Substack or gum Road.
You get the episodes early in ad free. You guys
may know I'm sponsored by Axios Remote Fitness Coaching. And finally,
the snow is melted. I live in the South. We're
not used to snow. It was a whole disaster. But
I'm back in the gym. JD. You guys would work.
Check him out, a small businessman, one of our guys.
He deserves your support, so check that out. And again, Daniel,
this was a ton of fun. Man.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, thanks for having me on and long live Canada.
Speaker 2: Everyone home, keep your head up, good night. Marketing is hard,
but I'll tell you a little secret. It doesn't have
to be. Let me point something out. You're listening to
a podcast right now and it's great. You love the host,
you seek it out and download. You listen to it
while driving, working out, cooking, even going to the bathroom.
Podcasts are a pretty close companion. And this is a
podcast ad? Did I get your attention? You can reach
great listeners like yourself with podcast advertising from libsynads. Choose
from hundreds of top podcasts offering host endorsements, or run
a pre produced ad like this one across thousands of shows.
To reach your target audience and their favorite podcasts with libsynads,
go to libsynads dot com. That's l I B s
y n ads dot com Today