OMG, everyone is going to hate this article -- because it rings too true. We are all going to want to cover our ears with our hands and go la la la to get these ideas out of our minds. Truth mixed with cutting sarcasm and the frightfully real visual of taking your stashed cash and running left me breathless. Who would have thought Crystia Freeland and Jen Gerson would be so like-minded?
And I would say it will probably turn out he’s Canada’s too. After he has made his money he will leave because he clearly has a social inferiority complex. He loves foreign media but can’t be bothered with Canadian unless he has to. Remember he IS European as he claimed and he also has an Irish passport. Don’t think he won’t use it.
He’s also over 90% invested in the US of A, not Canada. Sounds rather unreliable to me.
Freeland repurposed the title Britain had for Mark Carney as the governor of their Bank of England. They used it first. Mark carney was Britain’s unreliable boyfriend.
As I've said to more than a few people, all of whom think I'm nuts, the Americans struggle to figure out why Canada exists. To them, it's an oxymoron. They're raised to believe in American exceptionalism and the continued expansion of their civilization, one that stripped itself of the trappings of the British Empire centuries ago and could have only achieved what it has achieved by doing so.
To them, Mexico makes some kind of sense in that it's a different culture, a different history. Yet to the north is Canada - we didn't have the revolution, we separated through negotiation, which by itself suggests the revolution may not have been necessary to achieve democratic rule.
Further, we look largely the same, talk largely the same, have largely the same culture, interests, legal and financial system. Both are democratic nations. There's a long history of allyship, intermarriage, cross-border property ownership, investment and sharing. We have shared "national" sports leagues, the list goes on. From their perspective, if we have all that, why does Canada need to exist? It's just like the U.S.! Why wouldn't it want to join, right?
The very existence of Canada not only suggests the revolution wasn't necessary, but also that the American dream can be achieved right next door without all the trappings and national myths, and therefore America isn't as exceptional as it would like to think it is.
In other words, Canada's very existence shoots a big giant hole through the foundations of the American myth.
And don't forget our most famous comedians aren't successful because they poke fun at Canada necessarily, but rather they subtly point out the absurdity of the U.S. without calling it out directly, what we now call a subtweet (just watch an episode of SCTV).
We've been subtweeting the yanks for decades, occasionally they notice, and when they do it hurts in a place so deep, so personal, that they lose it, much like a spurned lover ;)
For me, you can't expect maturity from dysfunctional nations. I think we must also acknowledge how we got this place: citizens are less informed now either by distraction or design. The world has not been itself for a very long time. Our physical infrastructure is literally crumbling before our eyes.
We've allowed our governments to get away with it.
We always let them get away with it until the moment when the great political cleansing happens and a party is punted out of office because everyone is sick of it and its leader. Until we are sick with the next one and the next one after that.
We really should get some help for this. This is not normal national behavior. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting results is a sign something ain't right upstairs.
We don't want to talk about our relationship with the USA. To do so would force us to take a look at how miniscule and insignificant Canada is in terms of America even noticing us. It might also force us to ask ourselves how we are culturally different from Americans.
We don't have a relationship with the USA in the romantic sense. The last time this country did, Brian Mulroney was singing When Irish Eyes are Smiling with Ronnie and Nancy.
Anyway, why should the USA want to get romantic with a country as unserious as Canada?
I don't think we are any more or less feminized than we used to be. Historically, Canada has long been depicted as female. (Also, not sure that practicality:symbolism runs on a male:female axis. Women have historically been disproportionately relegated to "domestic" or purely practical realms. It's been the male that has traditionally held dominion over the more purely abstracted or symbolic.) JG
Yes, I know about Cousin Jonathan and how Canada was depicted in George Brown's Globe. But I am saying our actual society is more feminized than it was 80 years ago, as a natural and obvious consequence (or, perhaps, cause) of women being in positions of power. Are you really asserting that this isn't true?
Depends on what you mean by "feminine" I suppose. Is the country weaker for having a woman like me writing in the public sphere instead of churning butter and having more children?
Under Harper it was "Stand By Your Man."
Now it's "I Will Survive."
It reminds me of a Huey Lewis song. "Happy to be stuck with you."
Now you'll have that song in your head. You're welcome 😊
It's a damned fine song.
OMG, everyone is going to hate this article -- because it rings too true. We are all going to want to cover our ears with our hands and go la la la to get these ideas out of our minds. Truth mixed with cutting sarcasm and the frightfully real visual of taking your stashed cash and running left me breathless. Who would have thought Crystia Freeland and Jen Gerson would be so like-minded?
And I would say it will probably turn out he’s Canada’s too. After he has made his money he will leave because he clearly has a social inferiority complex. He loves foreign media but can’t be bothered with Canadian unless he has to. Remember he IS European as he claimed and he also has an Irish passport. Don’t think he won’t use it.
He’s also over 90% invested in the US of A, not Canada. Sounds rather unreliable to me.
Freeland repurposed the title Britain had for Mark Carney as the governor of their Bank of England. They used it first. Mark carney was Britain’s unreliable boyfriend.
I can only write one essay at a time. JG
Excellent piece!
As I've said to more than a few people, all of whom think I'm nuts, the Americans struggle to figure out why Canada exists. To them, it's an oxymoron. They're raised to believe in American exceptionalism and the continued expansion of their civilization, one that stripped itself of the trappings of the British Empire centuries ago and could have only achieved what it has achieved by doing so.
To them, Mexico makes some kind of sense in that it's a different culture, a different history. Yet to the north is Canada - we didn't have the revolution, we separated through negotiation, which by itself suggests the revolution may not have been necessary to achieve democratic rule.
Further, we look largely the same, talk largely the same, have largely the same culture, interests, legal and financial system. Both are democratic nations. There's a long history of allyship, intermarriage, cross-border property ownership, investment and sharing. We have shared "national" sports leagues, the list goes on. From their perspective, if we have all that, why does Canada need to exist? It's just like the U.S.! Why wouldn't it want to join, right?
The very existence of Canada not only suggests the revolution wasn't necessary, but also that the American dream can be achieved right next door without all the trappings and national myths, and therefore America isn't as exceptional as it would like to think it is.
In other words, Canada's very existence shoots a big giant hole through the foundations of the American myth.
And don't forget our most famous comedians aren't successful because they poke fun at Canada necessarily, but rather they subtly point out the absurdity of the U.S. without calling it out directly, what we now call a subtweet (just watch an episode of SCTV).
We've been subtweeting the yanks for decades, occasionally they notice, and when they do it hurts in a place so deep, so personal, that they lose it, much like a spurned lover ;)
Thank you for not getting into our home Province with your essay. I am tired of it and appreciate it.
Thanks, Jen. Among your finest essays since I began subscribing a couple of years ago.
And not a word about Alberta. 👍🏻
For me, you can't expect maturity from dysfunctional nations. I think we must also acknowledge how we got this place: citizens are less informed now either by distraction or design. The world has not been itself for a very long time. Our physical infrastructure is literally crumbling before our eyes.
We've allowed our governments to get away with it.
We always let them get away with it until the moment when the great political cleansing happens and a party is punted out of office because everyone is sick of it and its leader. Until we are sick with the next one and the next one after that.
We really should get some help for this. This is not normal national behavior. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting results is a sign something ain't right upstairs.
We don't want to talk about our relationship with the USA. To do so would force us to take a look at how miniscule and insignificant Canada is in terms of America even noticing us. It might also force us to ask ourselves how we are culturally different from Americans.
We don't have a relationship with the USA in the romantic sense. The last time this country did, Brian Mulroney was singing When Irish Eyes are Smiling with Ronnie and Nancy.
Anyway, why should the USA want to get romantic with a country as unserious as Canada?
Oh gosh what a treat!!!!! This is Gerson at her finest! Loved it, all of it!! You have a gift.
This also explains why, as society at large has become increasingly feminized, Canada's US policy has become less practical and more symbolic.
I don't think we are any more or less feminized than we used to be. Historically, Canada has long been depicted as female. (Also, not sure that practicality:symbolism runs on a male:female axis. Women have historically been disproportionately relegated to "domestic" or purely practical realms. It's been the male that has traditionally held dominion over the more purely abstracted or symbolic.) JG
Yes, I know about Cousin Jonathan and how Canada was depicted in George Brown's Globe. But I am saying our actual society is more feminized than it was 80 years ago, as a natural and obvious consequence (or, perhaps, cause) of women being in positions of power. Are you really asserting that this isn't true?
Depends on what you mean by "feminine" I suppose. Is the country weaker for having a woman like me writing in the public sphere instead of churning butter and having more children?
The metaphor is misplaced. Canada is better understood as a delusional child,.
Canada , apart from Quebec, has always been inextricably apart of the US as far as economic reality is concerned.
Canada always had more to gain from more economic integration not less.
But so many Canadian " careerists" are functionally illerated economically.
Alberta has choices.
Those choices become ever more obvious and imperative as Carney persists with imposing climate extremism and the open ended risks of Section 35.
Breakdown between Smith and Carney only intensifies the stakes and likelihood of real change post October.
This is not an article about Alberta, but some can’t help themselves.
This is brilliant. Thanks.
"Kayfabe" indeed (said of much that is American culture--and maybe some that is Canadian culture, too).
Thank you for this compelling op-ed.
It is always about Alberta.
There is something about the Canadian vehemence of rejected trust that speaks to teams of projection. Thanks for the historical context