Ever notice that it seems as time goes on, that everything in Canada seems to be gradually shittier, and shittier?

No matter who we seem elect, the country seems completely unable to do anything of any national significance anymore? It isn’t the inefficiency of governmental crown corporations – considering we’ve gutted almost every federal/provincial organization that was involved in direct action towards the public good since the 1980’s. Take a look at Toronto’s woes with trying to build a modern city rail system using the private-sector. It is over-budget, out of time and it feels like by the time it opens, most of the folks involved in it’s original creation will be dead or in old-age homes. Now imagine this country trying to do something as radical as nationalized rail, social housing, or even trying creating a public library system nowadays.

We are very much a country addicted to the concept of neoliberal economics, and we are worst off for it. We fear interjecting the government into core social/physical infrastructure, yet – we visibly see the failings of a rampant free-market before us. Instead we interchangeably vote into power the same two parties that economically share the same side of the same coin; desperately hopeful that maybe – just maybe, it’ll work better this time!

Peel back the shiny sticker of maple-washed politeness, and you’ll find a story left untold: a system quietly organized to keep two parties—the Liberals and Conservatives—playing the worst game of musical chairs while everyone else haplessly watches as food bank usage increases, a lack of housing remains unresolved both provincially/federally because we’re absolutely terrified of the idea of restarting public housing, and a healthcare system that was once a sense of patriotic pride is now free-falling piece by piece into collapse.

So, what’s the trick to always just these two parties in actual power, despite the on-going enshittification of everything that once worked for the common good?

Manufactured consent.

It’s like hypnosis, but instead of a swinging pocket watch, they use media monopolies, polling data, a steady national diet of “strategic voting” lectures, and a couple million dollars to keep things just a little bit more predictable and the national political discourse safe and cozy within the realm of the free market.

In Canada, the concentration of media ownership is actually quite staggering – like to the point, you’d have to wonder, how the hell did we ever let it get this bad. A small handful of corporations— mostly Bell, Rogers, Postmedia, and Quebecor—control the majority of the country’s newspapers, television stations, and digital news platforms.

Think of it like a group project where only four people get to do all the talking, and they’re all reading from the same generic script, but the script only has six words: “Don’t fuck up the gravy train.”

Once you realize it, the silence from either of the two-party dominants on the current state of Canadian media is deafening, because they both benefit greatly from it’s existence. It’ll be a very cold day in hell, when either a Liberal or Conservative candidate speaks out in favour of diversification in Canadian media.

While public broadcasters like the CBC offer some diversity, their funding is ultimately tied to the federal government, which means they have to be just critical enough to seem unbiased but not so critical that they lose their budget. The result? A media landscape that over-amplifies the voices of the Liberals and Conservatives while treating smaller parties like background extras in a political drama that is unless you’re everyone’s favourite perennial talking head – Tom Mulcair.

A key tool of manufactured consent is the careful framing of political discourse. Canadian media often presents our elections as a binary choice: Liberal or Conservative. That’s it. That’s the whole goddamn menu. Want something different than partially microwaved “beef” stroganoff straight from the can or a bowl of lemon juice and powdered glass? Sorry, them’s the brakes.

Smaller parties are consistently painted as fringe, unrealistic, or even just completely ignored. The NDP, despite its long history and substantive policy platforms when given power provincially or as kingmaker in federal minority governments, is often dismissed as “too radical” or “unrealistic”—terms that translate roughly to “this might fuck up my stock portfolio.” Meanwhile, the Green Party is often reduced in media to a one-issue platform, such as “Yay for grass and/or Elizabeth May!”. Despite this, both parties have raised numerous policy issues that directly touch very real issues that affect working-class Canadians and our overall democracy such as a lack of sustainable housing, the growing wealth gap, the privatization of public services that endanger the revenue of social infrastructure, and the dangers of political inaction in effectively combating climate change that our two-party dominant democracy absolutely refuses to entertain seriously. These are very real existential crises that will threaten our democracy.

It sure seems that in Canada, you have the illusion of choice to the flavour of your democracy; either it’s cruelty served through social austerity for everyone but the rich, and white-collar laissez-faire liberal capitalism that’ll toss crumbs when the poors get too rowdy.

Any outcomes outside the established political duopoly will result in structural changes to the political capital that feeds this ongoing system in Canada. So – it has become a self-sustaining cycle of maintaining political groupthink to ensure that the system survives – hence the continued cycle of Liberal-Conservative reign within the media. Anything outside of it is considered a danger to it’s existence. I mean, god forbid that a federal NDP or Green government get into power (somehow) and do some actual good? People might actually be swayed to empower people over profits if it means a better standard of life for what they pay in taxes.

Additionally, modern media coverage during elections rarely focuses on policies or platforms. Instead, it emphasizes “horse race politics”—polling data, leader charisma, and a hyper-fixation on every single gaffe. This trivializes politics and reduces voter engagement to a spectator sport, where citizens are encouraged to “pick a winner” rather than advocate for meaningful change.

Oh, and good luck competing if you’re a smaller party with an actually good slate of national/provincial public policy. The advertising costs to effectively get your messaging heard across the country/province alone will bankrupt your party until the next election, so you’ll mostly likely just end up blamed for vote splitting and/or accused being an absent party leader by a bunch of Redditors. It’s not that the other parties don’t have policies, it’s that they’re not being heard on mainstream information channels anymore. And even if you do get the cash to get heard, chances are the other parties will drown you out with a brigade of paid attack ads.

This is why the two most powerful parties are also the richest parties, and why they will bend over backwards to get that sweet, sweet political donor cash which allows them to buy the lion’s share of political air-time.

Polling data can be another weapon in the arsenal of manufactured consent. Constant polling updates create the illusion that only the leading parties are worth considering. It’s like watching a cooking show where the winner is decided halfway through, because their shitty banana bread was the first to rise. This not only influences media coverage but also affects voter psychology. Citizens are actively discouraged from voting for smaller parties, fearing their vote will be “wasted” if it doesn’t contribute to defeating the party they dislike the most.

Most frustratingly, is that while the Liberals and Conservatives may differ on social issues, their economic policies often reflect a shared neoliberal consensus. Both parties – when elected – have overseen decades of gradual privatization, austerity measures, and deference to corporate power over the public.

Media outlets rarely scrutinize this shared economic agenda. Instead, they focus on superficial differences, like the tone of climate policy, and the speed of implementing changes without challenging the structural inequalities both parties uphold. After all, why rock the boat when everyone on board who matters to you is already sitting in first class?

Left-wing movements in Canada face significant hurdles in gaining equitable media attention from outside the neoliberal sandbox. Policies like *actual* universal pharmacare, affordable and accessible housing, and a progressive wealth tax—are all policies widely supported by many Canadians of every political spectrum — but are often dismissed in the media as “naive” or “anti-business.”

Even labour movements, the very cornerstone of Canada’s progressive working class history, are portrayed negatively. Labour strikes and protests are framed as inconveniences to the public rather than as legitimate responses to systemic exploitation. This framing subtly reinforces the notion that challenging the system is disruptive and—worst of all—bad for business. In a timely example, take a look at the media coverage of the 2024 Canada Post strike. Media coverage focused on children’s letters to Santa going unsent, and holiday parcels not going to be sent to loved ones in time for Christmas. Meanwhile, postal workers are fighting for better working conditions, and to achieve livable wages above inflation in a country that is becoming more and more unaffordable. I mean, it makes sense no? The mail service keeps churning, day and night through both rain, sleet and snow – that’s because of the working men and women behind it. Yet the media collectively promoted anti-worker narratives, focusing on business centred interests. Even going so far as to call the postal service out of date.

Why? Because of the postal strike is interfering in the business of retail/online capital during the holiday season, and as you should know by now – don’t fuck with the interests of the free market if you’re taking the money of industry giants to run political campaigns.

Unsurprisingly, both the Liberals and the Conservatives are united in fucking over the workers – now having been ordered back to work by the Liberal government. The folks once heralded as essential heroes during the pandemic are now – somehow – less essential and no longer heroes; because asking for a better wage at an essential public service is just a step too far nowadays.

Breaking the cycle of manufactured consent in Canada requires systemic change. Here are some steps we can take – assuming we’re ready to upset a few powerful people and a couple billionaires:

1. Media Reform: Diversify media ownership and strengthen independent journalism through public funding that isn’t tied to government approval. Extensively promote the expansion of non-profit news media organizations, and establish robust press councils to uphold journalistic standards and combat sources of misinformation.
   
2. Electoral Reform: Move away from the first-past-the-post system to proportional representation and ranked-choice ballots, allowing smaller parties to gain representation and influence. It’s time for Canada to leave this notion that ‘winner-takes-all’ is the best approach to running a modern state.
   
3. Media Literacy: Educate Canadians on how to critically analyze media narratives and recognize bias using public campaigns, engaging Canadians in online spaces, and teaching young Canadians on how to think critically.

But please – for the love of Christ – don’t let Tom Mulcair discover the political side of Canadian TikTok.

-K-