Lament for a Nation

According to Grant, Diefenbaker's position against the Bomarc was defeated by the Central Canadian establishment, who conspired with the Liberal Party to bring down Diefenbaker and diminish Canadian sovereignty. This was his lament; he felt there was an emerging Americanization of Canadians and Canadian culture due to the inability of Canadians to live outside of the hegemony of American liberal capitalism - and the technology that emanates from that system. He saw a trend occurring in Canada from one of nationalism to continentalism.

Grant suggested that the absorption of Canada into the United States was due in part to the idea of human progress as an inevitable force of a homogenizing nature, which occurs through the power of government, corporations, and technology.[1]^:273–5 He notes that the idea of progress is often associated with improvement, that it is assumed that evolution will always be a positive change.[1]^:340 He asserts that necessity and good are not the same thing and in his conclusion he ponders the good that can result from the erasure of boundaries between the two countries, such as increased access to material goods and more significantly the freedom offered by liberalism.[1]^:276 Grant also argued that the media was used to enforce power structures rather than to convey factual data following the practice of empire.[1]^:281

Grant follows Diefenbaker’s rise and fall noting that when his 1957 victory was due to his support by local business men who were threatened by large corporations, ironically, his later defeat would be due to the same reason, large corporations were offended by his opposition and concern with the people.[1]^:283–6

Described as one of the seminal works of Canadian political thought,[3] it discusses the influence of the United States via liberalism and technology on Canada - which Grant argued was traditionally a less liberal and more traditionally conservative entity and culture. Grant argued that Canada was doomed as a nation as was illustrated by the 1963 Bomarc Missile Program crisis. He predicted the end of Canadian nationalism, which for Grant meant a small-town, populist conception of Canada as a British North American alternative to American capitalism and empire, and a move towards continentalism.

In 1970, five years after the book was published, Grant admits it was written out of anger more than anything, yet also was a nostalgic reminiscence of the former uniqueness of Canada, because "Canada was once a nation with meaning and purpose".[1]^:272