A perspective inspired by Vaclav Smil's fact-based pragmatism

With just four days until Canadians head to the polls in what has become an increasingly tight race, the fundamental choice facing voters has crystallized around two starkly different visions for the country's future. As the Liberal Party under Mark Carney and the Conservative Party led by Pierre Poilievre enter the final stretch, their platforms represent dramatically divergent approaches to governance, taxation, and Canada's place in the world.

Why This Analysis Draws from Vaclav Smil's Approach

Note: Vaclav Smil is not affiliated with this website or article. The analysis that follows is simply inspired by his fact-based approach to complex issues.

For those unfamiliar with Vaclav Smil, he is a Czech-Canadian scientist and Distinguished Professor Emeritus at the University of Manitoba who has quietly shaped how the world thinks about energy, resources, and growth. Often described as a "slayer of bullshit," Smil has authored more than 40 books on subjects ranging from energy transitions to food production, earning him a devoted following that includes Bill Gates, who claims to "wait for new Smil books the way some people wait for the next Star Wars movie".

What makes Smil's perspective so valuable in today's political landscape is his unwavering commitment to facts, numerical analysis, and interdisciplinary thinking. He cuts through ideological posturing with data-driven insights, challenging both progressive and conservative orthodoxies. As he famously stated, "Solutions never come from extremes. What we need is the dull, factually correct and accurate middle".

In an era of polarized politics and simplistic solutions, Smil's approach—grounded in physical realities rather than wishful thinking—offers a refreshing framework for evaluating political platforms. His work reminds us that all human activities are ultimately constrained by material limits, energy requirements, and the laws of physics—realities that politicians often ignore.

The Liberal Vision: Government Solutions and Strategic Investment

The Liberal platform, "Canada Strong," presents a vision centered on government-led solutions to Canada's challenges. After taking over from Justin Trudeau, Carney has positioned himself as the steady hand needed during turbulent times.

Economic and Fiscal Approach

The Liberal plan involves significant government spending – $130 billion over four years – funded primarily through standard taxation and projected economic growth. Their approach accepts larger deficits, projecting an increase to $63 billion in 2025-26 before falling to $48 billion by 2028-29.

This approach seems to ignore warnings about the limits of growth. Smil has consistently emphasized that "growth must come to an end" and that "our economist friends don't seem to realize that". The Liberal platform's assumption that Canada can simply grow its way out of deficits contradicts the understanding that infinite growth on a finite planet is physically impossible.

Infrastructure and Defense

A cornerstone of the Liberal platform is massive investment in infrastructure and defense. They plan to immediately inject $35.2 billion this year for infrastructure upgrades and meeting NATO targets, including an extra $30.9 billion for defense over four years.

One might question whether these massive expenditures will deliver proportional improvements in Canadians' quality of life or simply maintain increasingly complex and costly systems. Vaclav Smil consistently highlights through his books and presentations the diminishing returns of complex systems and the tendency of modern societies to solve problems through increased energy and resource consumption rather than efficiency.

Housing and Climate

The Liberals pledge to double down on the National Housing Accelerator Fund and tie federal infrastructure dollars to housing outcomes. On climate, they've committed to cancelling the federal carbon pricing system for consumers while maintaining it for corporations.

This represents a contradiction —attempting to address climate change while avoiding the political costs of asking consumers to change behavior. When reflecting upon Smil's work, he emphasizes that meaningful energy transitions are necessarily slow, difficult, and expensive, requiring honest acknowledgment of trade-offs rather than promises of painless solutions.

The Conservative Vision: Tax Cuts and Limited Government

Pierre Poilievre's Conservative platform, "Canada First," presents a fundamentally different approach centered on tax cuts, smaller government, and unleashing private sector growth.

Economic and Fiscal Approach

The Conservative plan focuses on affordability through tax reduction – proposing a 15% cut to the federal income tax rate on the lowest bracket. They project $100 billion in new spending over four years, offset by $125 billion in savings from cuts to consultants, bureaucracy, and foreign aid.

A Smil-inspired analysis might appreciate the Conservatives' focus on efficiency and waste reduction, but would likely question their assumption that economic growth will naturally follow tax reductions. As Smil has documented extensively, prosperity ultimately depends on material resources and energy, not just financial incentives.

Housing and Energy

The Conservative housing plan aims to build 2.3 million homes over five years by eliminating federal GST on new homes up to $1.3 million. On energy, Poilievre has promised to eliminate the federal carbon tax entirely, arguing this would lower costs immediately.

This approach prioritizes short-term affordability over long-term sustainability—a trade-off that would identify as problematic. While Smil has criticized certain climate solutions as unrealistic, he has also documented the finite nature of fossil fuels and the environmental impacts of their continued use.

The Reality Gap: What Both Platforms Miss

What's striking about both platforms is what they omit: an honest acknowledgment of the physical realities that will shape Canada's future regardless of who forms government.

The Growth Imperative

Both parties remain wedded to the paradigm of endless economic growth, despite mounting evidence that infinite growth on a finite planet is physically impossible. As Smil has repeatedly emphasized, "Growth must come to an end. Our economist friends don't seem to realize that".

Neither platform acknowledges that Canada's economy, like all modern economies, faces diminishing returns from increasing complexity. The Liberals believe government spending can drive growth indefinitely; the Conservatives believe tax cuts and deregulation can do the same. Both ignore the physical limits that ultimately constrain all human systems.

Energy Transitions

Both platforms make promises about energy that ignore hard physical realities. The Liberals maintain commitments to rapid decarbonization while backing away from policies that might actually achieve it. The Conservatives dismiss climate concerns entirely, promising cheaper fossil fuels without acknowledging their finite nature or environmental impacts.

Neither approach reflects the reality that energy transitions are necessarily slow, difficult, and expensive. As Smil has documented extensively, the world still gets approximately 80% of its energy from fossil fuels, and the fundamental industries that underpin modern civilization remain deeply dependent on carbon-intensive processes.

The Path Forward: Realism Without Cynicism

As Canadians prepare to vote, they deserve more than competing fantasies. They deserve a clear-eyed assessment of Canada's position and prospects.

The reality is that Canada faces significant challenges: an aging population, declining productivity, housing shortages, and increasing global instability. Addressing these challenges will require not grand promises but incremental improvements, not ideological purity but pragmatic problem-solving.

What would a truly realistic platform look like? It would acknowledge that economic growth will likely slow regardless of policy choices. It would focus on improving efficiency and reducing waste in existing systems rather than promising transformative change. It would recognize that energy transitions take decades, not years, and require sustained investment and policy stability.

Most importantly, it would tell Canadians the truth: that the era of easy growth is ending, that difficult trade-offs lie ahead, and that our goal should be not endless expansion but a stable, sustainable standard of living that can be maintained for generations to come.

As Smil himself has said, "Solutions never come from extremes. What we need is the dull, factually correct and accurate middle". Neither the Liberal nor Conservative platform offers this middle path. Instead, both offer versions of what might be called "narcissistic delusions of grandeur" – the belief that Canada can avoid the fundamental constraints that shape all human societies.

The choice Canadians face on April 28 is not just between two parties but between two inadequate visions of the future. The true challenge will be building a more realistic vision after the election, regardless of who forms government.

This opinion piece draws inspiration from Vaclav Smil's fact-based, interdisciplinary approach to complex issues. While politicians often deal in simplistic promises and ideological certainties, Smil's work reminds us that reality is messier, more constrained, and more complex than our political narratives suggest. By applying an analytical framework inspired by his work to Canada's current political choices, we gain a clearer understanding of the physical and material realities that will ultimately determine our nation's future, regardless of which party wins on April 28. Vaclav Smil has no affiliation with this publication or the author of this article.