Week 41: Finn de L'ère
What can the Finns teach us about overcoming cynicism? And the permanent weirdness of Canadian politics
Following attending the Helsinki Security Forum a couple of weeks ago, this past week I had an article published in The Interpreter on what Australia could learn from Finland’s doctrine of “total defence”. The Finns take being prepared for crises incredibly seriously due to the long border that they share with Russia. Yet total defence is not solely about physical security, it is also about building a society that has psychological resilience –a public that can handle crises, as well as be immune to malign information.
Central to this is overcoming cynicism. This is something that I feel is particularly inspiring about Finland. The relentless cynicism and bad faith of our current era has been weighing on me lately. It’s draining. Which is, of course, its purpose. But there is a necessity is develop perspectives, social structures and personal mannerisms to resist it.
The reality may be that the Finns cannot afford to be cynics. Given their neighbourhood, the stakes are too high. During the forum I scribbled in my notebook – the luxury to be dickheads. Which I feel may be the conditions under which other Western countries operate. As I wrote:
Alongside manpower, Finland’s national service also instils a strong public sense of duty and responsibility, built on individual recognition of the stakes. It has developed a culture where personal integrity is important, good faith is intrinsic, and service is not scoffed at. The country’s national character – embodied by the term sisu – is one of stoic determination and an action-oriented mindset. It is no coincidence that the Finns consistently rank as the world’s happiest people.
Central to this is an active understanding of what it means to be a citizen. Citizenship is not merely a legal designation. Nor should it be confused with nationalism. It’s a compact with society. It should be a commitment to turn one’s attention outward, rather than inward. To see duty and responsibility to others as one’s purpose, to build resilience and character, not cultivate grievance, fragility and self-involvement.
Sharing a border with a permanently belligerent state obviously focuses the mind. The Finns don’t live in a crèche, and understand that a crèche is not what societies should be striving towards. Even without living in a threatening neighbourhood.
Finns consider being a Finnish citizen a compact that one must commit to and tend to. While this may seem illiberal to some in Australia, the Finns have understood that liberal democracy doesn’t defend itself. Liberalism is not freedom from responsibility, it is the freedom to be responsible.
Decline and Fall
The permanent struggle of my life is trying to convince people that Canadian politics is both very weird and incredibly interesting. Canadians themselves have done an excellent job of projecting an image to the world of being boring and unexciting, but this is a ruse. While the country – thankfully – avoids blood and guts, its democracy is dramatic. Maybe not in the manner of its southern neighbour, with its lust for straight up insanity, but more in the sense that its party politics and its elections are highly volatile. Party systems – which are unique at both federal and provincial level – frequently change1. This makes its politics complex and therefore utterly fascinating.
Central to this is Canadians’ love of murdering political parties. Provincial politics especially is littered with the bones of once powerful political parties that no longer exist. Canadians see political parties as serving a time-bound purpose. When this purpose is complete, the party is dispensed with. Parties that once dominated provincial politics like the United Farmers (Alberta), the Social Credit Party (Alberta and British Columbia), the Union Nationale (Quebec) quickly folded after being voted out of office.
Federally, the most recent example was the 1993 election, when the Progressive Conservative Party was cut down from a governing majority of 156 seats to just 2. The party limped along for another decade before its carcass was then consumed by the Reform Party to form the current Conservative Party of Canada.
However, something even more ridiculous has occurred in British Columbia over the past few months. Rather than being murdered by the public, the party formerly known as the BC Liberals committed suicide.
The BC Liberals were the province’s centre-right party2. Aside from the New Democratic Party (NDP), provincial and federal political parties with the same or similar names are unaffiliated with each other. Ideologically, the BC Liberals were somewhat akin to the Australian Liberal Party – an alliance of liberals and conservatives born out of the strength of the union-aligned NDP in the province (the Saskatchewan Party is a similar party in its province).
The BC Liberals governed British Columbia from 2001 to 2017. At the 2017 election they won the most seats, but with being one seat shy of a majority they were unable to form a government (the NDP entered a coalition with the Greens). Over the past 7 years they have remained a strong opposition – winning 28 seats and a third of the vote at the last election in 2020.
Despite the fact that Canadians clearly understand the distinction between federal and provincial politics and vote accordingly (often in highly distinct ways), the BC Liberals became obsessed with the idea that people would associate them with the federal Liberal Party (who are currently very unpopular). This led to the party deciding to change their name. Taking inspiration from Alberta’s United Conservative Party – a recent merger of the collapsed provincial Progressive Conservative Party3 and the Wildrose Party – they renamed themselves BC United.
It safe to say the rebrand didn’t go well. Support for the party nose-dived – with people confused about where the BC Liberals had gone. And as politics abhors a vacuum, with the need for at least some form of opposition, this presented an opportunity for the BC Conservatives – a party who haven’t won a seat in the province since 1975.
The BC Conservatives had gained an MP in 2023 when former BC Liberal minister, John Rustad, was kicked out of the party over some tweets denying climate change. He subsequently joined the BC Conservatives and became its leader. After the folly of the BC United rebrand became apparent, 7 more MPs jumped ship to the BC Conservatives. A party that secured less than 2% of the vote at the previous election is now polling around 42%.
What is even more extraordinary is that when parliament was dissolved on 21 September – ahead of a 19 October election – BC United were still the official opposition with 20 MPs. However, the party has decided not to contest the election at all – believing it to be a futile exercise.4 I can’t recall a situation where a healthy party has just decided to quit politics all together. It’s bonkers.
Although it says something about the nature of the BC Conservatives (ie they’re thoroughly cooked) that 20 MPs from BC United given the opportunity to save their careers have decided not to join the party.
For a more thorough dive into how this mess eventuated this podcast episode with pollster Philippe J. Fournier is a good listen.
Aside from a few little quirks like the Liberal National Party in Queensland, and the Liberal and National parties in WA not having a coalition agreement, Australia is far too gutless to have different party systems between federal and state levels.
As much as I despise the left-right spectrum, it’s a convenient shorthand here
This was a separate collapse to the federal Progressive Conservative Party. In Alberta the Progressive Conservative Party governed the province continuously from 1971 to 2015 before being wiped out and then subjected to a merger from a position of weakness.
The party are running a handful of paper candidates in order to maintain registration as a political party with BC Elections. But are not campaigning.