Following the In The Shadows Cabinet of people around Prime Minister is instructive to how things are playing out.
Mr. Bremmer, President of the Eurasia Group predicted long ago that the inflammatory rhetoric of Trump had raised the slumbering nationalist streak of Canadians and that Canadian politicians would take advantage of it by putting up a fight before the election. Mr. Bremmer concluded that he "expected Canada would quietly fold shortly after the vote to ensure that the ongoing negotiations with the US remain functional."
If Ms. Gerson wonders whether Carney really believed in the elbows up narrative of the election campaign, well there's the answer. In fact Carney was removing counter tariffs imposed by Trudeau during the campaign and most of them have been quietly removed since, but not before reeling in a billion or two from Canadians unfortunate enough to buy US goods while the tariffs were still in place.
Canadians settled on a risk averse technocrat to lead us through the wilderness of the Trump Administration, failing to consider that bankers are not hard wired to take chances or stand tall above the bulwarks waiting to become Donald Trump cannon fodder.
The early going seems to justify the old sentiment that the Liberals are great at getting elected, governing...not so much.
"Mr. Bremmer, President of the Eurasia Group predicted long ago that the inflammatory rhetoric of Trump had raised the slumbering nationalist streak of Canadians and that Canadian politicians would take advantage of it by putting up a fight before the election. Mr. Bremmer concluded that he "expected Canada would quietly fold shortly after the vote to ensure that the ongoing negotiations with the US remain functional.""
I pointed this article out to many people during the election but it fell on deaf ears. This was 100% Carney's view and plan. The rhetoric was obvious garbage. I'm not even sure this approach is wrong, but it is the opposite of the BS that got the Boomers frothing like lunatics at those ridiculous "elbows up" rallies.
As a ‘Boomer’ who wouldn’t vote for reckless spending Liberals and knowing few other Boomers who would I want a polling firm to determine where these Boomers reside, because it isn’t in the West.
Oh, I think I know some in Saskatchewan, Alberta, and BC. I'm guessing you don't move in the same circles. Also, the thing about Boomer support for the Liberals isn't that it's monolithic, it's just that a bit over 50% of them favor the Liberals. That sticks out when it's the Conservatives who have plurality support in all other age categories at the moment.
All I care about is results, and the ad did not help make Canadian’s lives better. I don’t need government to be my moral inspiration, they need to provide infrastructure and make laws and regulations that protect the interest of Canadians, and enforce those laws and regulations.
Ok, let’s play with that idea. If all you’re looking for is an easy life and a government that provides infrastructure, laws, and regulation, then why be Canadian at all? What if someone makes the argument that you’d be richer as an American; that all your metrics around regulation and laws would be the same or better. Why bother fighting at all? Why be a Canadian as opposed to any other thing? JG
Indeed. That last question about 'why be Canadian' should not be rhetorical but seriously and deeply considered. I wonder how many could come up with a compelling, rational, evidence-based answer? I haven't heard or read one in the last decade or more and I'm always looking but I am inundated with emotive, delusional, and empty rhetoric recalling of past glories that (apparently) can never resurface as modern policy or made manifest through achievements because, you know, 'nice'. Now that Canada has successfully rewritten our history into being a genocidal criminal people and all current and future development of natural resources is a crime against humanity, why... the future looks golden!
I too wonder how many could come up with such an answer. I'd bet 8-out-of-10 would land on some version of, "we're not like those yucky Americans because - pick at least one - health care/guns/obnoxious/crass".
Trump II should have served as the much-needed kick in our ass to get our act together. Instead we have spent almost a full year fretting about what he says/does despite the fact that he is totally unpredictable and therefore impossible to "manage". It sounds crazy to say this about the President of the USA because obviously his actions impact us but, due to his unpredictability/volatility, he is, in essence, reduced to nothing more than a distraction. Should we kiss his ass or have our elbows up? It is impossible to know!! And yet, hardly a week goes by without fretting about him through this lens.
The only way to deal with him is to make this country economically strong. Yet this fretting has gone on for almost a year and as far as I can tell we are still no closer to getting our natural resources out of the ground than we were on the fateful night Junior put his foot in his mouth at Mara-Lago. And WRT Supply Management, the lowest of impossibly low-hanging fruit, we continue to (seemingly PROUDLY!!!!) cling to it like a man thrown a 50 pound boulder in the middle of the ocean. It is to weep.
I'm in total agreement about Trump. He's more like a slow-moving natural disaster that needs to be endured than something we can control. Batten down the hatches, fill the sandbags, hope for the best, and maybe now isn't the time to worry too much about how much Co2 we are generating. Other than that focus on ourselves and don't even worry about him day to day.
The most damage he's done has been by re-writing out politics to keep the Liberals in power, likely on purpose as a way to keep us weak and divided. I liken it to the insane way the US reacted to 9/11 being worse than the disaster itself.
Lest we forget has already been forgotten by so many so-called (and hyphenated - a term I used back in the early 70s in Maclean's) Canadians with every Hamas-supporting demonstration and the mewling response from every level of government and every institution that has gone along to get along with the Islamofascist, progressive lies and deceits and apologies that support them. This is how liberal democracy dies, incrementally, one small rationalized defeat at a time, capitulating to the mob and ignoring/undermining both principled liberal values and respect for what's true.
The problem is that the only sensible answer, "Canadians are a people", completely contradicts bien-pensant Liberal views in immigration and assimilation and calls for massive remigration.
You know, it's funny. It IS hard to describe what it means to be Canadian.
And... I sure do get offended when I'm travelling and I'm mistaken as American...
So what do I think makes me Canadian? Here's a few thoughts:
Tolerance of diversity - yup, despite the racism that exists here, I think we are pretty tolerant of differences between people. I was at IKEA the other day picking up a few things, and there were so many people from so many different places all doing the same as me: picking up some things to make my home work better or at least offer me some Scandinavian swagger, eating the meatballs with fries and gravy, and slurping a frozen yogurt for dessert. Around me were women in hijabs, a few ladies in saris, ladies in dresses with bright African prints on them, guys speaking Spanish and Arabic and French etc, and me in my jeans and ball cap. Just a normal day at IKEA. Nobody was bothering anyone. So yeah, tolerance, that's one.
My second suggestion is respect for the rule of law... despite our blatent habit of speeding and disregard of a few other traffic laws, I'd say that for the most part, we still believe in the rule of law. And in queueing up and not budding in. That's a thing... we get very irate when people bud into a line.
As a people, we're pretty aware of the international scene. Given we've all got friends and family all around the world, we keep track of world events because they affect us and they affect people we love. I do think this is a national characteristic.
Canadians are generous and it comes out in funny ways. Mostly around Christmas when we also give room for other seasonal celebrations because we don't want to be rude or cause offense.
We follow the weather. It's a huge topic of discussion. Maybe other peoples do this too, but it's a national pastime here.
And finally, if I'm off the road in a snowstorm, I know that someone will stop and see if I'm ok. I've had that happen, and I've done it for others. We push each other out of snowbanks when needed.
Ok, I'm alluding to values we share - diversity, tolerance, respect, awareness of and concern for others, generosity, connection, queueing, and the weather... maybe that's a start? ;-)
Nobody who isn't calling for remigration of millions of temporary residents really has any business expecting people to make sacrifices to remain "Canadian".
If we are merely a paperwork nation, why wouldn't we support becoming American, if that makes us better off?
And if we are a people, how on earth could it be sane to admit 5 million foreigners, almost all from the third world, in just a few years?
I wouldn't characterize that comment as "looking for an easy life". Perhaps it is a recognition that the biggest threat to Canada is currently economic. Our young people cannot buy homes to raise a family. Our standard of living is slipping, and all the leading indicators (business investment, tax code changes, deregulation) are stalled. If we want to continue to have a country, or want to raise a new generation that even still believes in this country, we need to get results. Dumb ads, that make us feel good, don't get results.
Right now Canadians need to eliminate the countless laws and regulations that are harmful to the interests of Canadians, before they even think of new ones. Then look to the civil service jobs that can be eliminated as a result.
Oops I got caught in the indent trap. I meant to reply to Trevor’s point not yours. I agree with your point. But to me being Canadian (or anything else) is a state of mind and a shared value system.
I may be idealistic. My own view is freedom of expression, accept all opinions without necessary believing in them, live and let live. Freedom OF religion not FROM religion like in Quebec. A moral code regardless of source. Golden rule. Right to property and life and the access to tools to defend them. Honor those whose shoulders you stand on.
The Quebec example is about working as an agent of the public but imposing personal beliefs into such public roles that have nothing to do with religion. People in Quebec are free to practice their religion in whatever private domains they inhabit. But to import such personal religious beliefs into public roles and express them there as if part of that role is both selfish and rude and a form of evangelizing those who must participate in the public domain. Why should your child be subjected daily to the personal religious beliefs of their public school teacher? Why should a police officer present him- or herself to the public as a believer of this or that religious affiliation? Does doing so help or hinder that officer enforcing the law? This is where uniforms are meant to remove the private beliefs and preferences of the individual wearing it not because it's a freedom-from issue but rather an intentional statement of state neutrality necessary FOR freedom of.
Have we given Carney enough time yet to prove he's not who he (and mostly his handlers and the media) told us he was?
Do we realize now that electing an individual who ditched Canada for better opportunities 10 years earlier, with no political record, vague promises, and no clear idea how he would or would not govern, might have been a bad idea?
Oops.
Well sounds like we are about to be stuck with him for at least another 3.5 years thanks to "anything to win" Liberal ethos and spineless Red Tory floor crossers.
‘Red’ Tories were always socially progressive while being fiscally conservative. Don’t see how this translates to supporting a very socially progressive and over spending Liberal government.
That's a generous interpretation. Many are actual and wannabe career politicians with no strong opinions who will just go with whatever makes getting elected easiest. This is a natural fit for Liberals because that's sort of their central philosophy. But sometimes you can't clinch that Liberal nomination or live somewhere that having a blue sign with your face on it is the easier path to victory.
Spot on, Jen. I agree with you. I was stunned when Carney apologized-have to admit that I thought it wasn’t true at first. My worry is growing that Carney doesn’t get why he was elected. We need a principled leader, not an economist, right now.
We'll agree to disagree. Trump is nuts, and any deal signed with him is about as meaningful as Hitler and Stalin's non-aggression pact. However, why not attempt to lower the temperature? The ad accomplished more than Doug could have hoped for. But did it help relations? No, not really. I think Carney played politics, which is what we hired him to do. He played the sucker with an ego-appeasing, insincere apology to lower the temperature. Politics is a game. The long game is better.
This is why I subscribe to the line: to read AngryJen's™ acerbic and oh-so pointed criticism our complacency and risk-aversion.
And also to know that the Trekkie conversion is complete. When Jen makes reference to Trek's Kobayashi Maru all by herself, we all know what's really going on.
Carney is far from the only leader who has apologized to, flattered or otherwise kowtowed (or seemed to, in the moment) in the face of tantrums emanating from the shambolic White House. It's become a recognisable and likely understandable ritual. Apologise, and/or flatter and/or back down (or appear to do so), and try to get back on track. Zelenskyy is perhaps the model for doing this, not because he wanted to, but because it's the only way to deal with Trump.
I'm not precisely defending Carney, and agree that Ford, despite his many failings, is really the one who deserves an apology in this specific instance. I just don't think any other party leader in the PM's shoes would have done differently when it came down to it.
P.S. There are many reasons to be unhappy with Carney / the federal liberals, but until the Opposition gets itself a capable leader, things aren't going to get better.
We look weak because we are weak - not because Mark Carney is saying the wrong things. Doug pretends to be strong, but he isn't. Mark pretends he has a good hand to play, but he doesn't. You pretend there is a winning way to play a losing hand, but there isn't.
This is about minimizing our losses. No one likes Trump. He was, is, and always will be, a jerk. But he can hurt us more then we can hurt him, and we need to remember this.
Overall, I like the tone and intention of the post. But it does contain something fairly typical in so many discussions about the state of Canada that I think is worth contending.
One of the great failings Canada has committed certainly throughout the 21st Century - both institutionally and by the majority of its people - is that the country has warmly embraced the notion that believing in fictions justifies presenting them as if facts. Jen has done the same here thinking it bolsters her case ("...the overblown fiction of a [fentanyl] crisis") about Canadian independence from it suzerain status with the US. I disagree strongly. I think just the opposite is the case here.
In fact, the core idea that "Canada should preserve the right to determine for itself how much of a problem these things actually are, and to devote resources according to our assessment, not that of a foreign power," is exactly what has placed us in the (for now) economic crosshairs of the world's dominant superpower as an unserious country with our outstanding and repeatedly demonstrated failure to believe in the preponderance of overwhelming contrary evidence of a narrative. We have fooled ourselves with our own fiction. It is a fiction, and shown to be such, only BY the victim of our delusion, namely, the foreign power we call the US and its multiple state and federal agencies that can show just adversely affected by our failures to understand the problem and act responsibly has been. And why our response to our own guilt is spectacularly insufficient. We don't respond appropriately because we BELIEVE - as Jen assures us - that it's the problem and not our response that is the (largely) fiction! This raises a rather important question: Why should we as a state believe any differently when we continue to allow belief in some fictional narrative to trump compelling evidence from reality? (I'll bet you can start to name other fictional narratives that have also redefined Canada and reduced our standing in the world that long predate Trump...).
Being assured we - as patriots, of course - should substitute our preferred fictional narrative that we're not (much of) a problem to the US is not helpful because it's not truthful. What's lost by repeating this narrative is any public awareness of just how much of a SOURCE of the problem Canada has become for the United States specifically and the west generally. Fentanyl supply in thousands of kilos (billions of lethal doses) is just one small branch of the problem. In reality, we play a key role in being China's (and the Cartels') backdoor to the US - especially with drug precursors, drugs themselves, and massive associated money laundering and other financial services - that advances hostile foreign powers like China and Iran harming the US as well as ourselves. Pretending otherwise, that the problem must be determined by domestic intelligence rather than states victimized by our refusal to even recognize the scope of the problem we play (which, in spite of best efforts by those in woefully inadequate Canadian law enforcement, consistently yields compromised and dropped multinational investigations with no real changes in practice, no meaningful convictions, but a country known as a favoured state for harbouring transnational criminals under the Canadian passport), is simply a non starter because it has been tried for decades and is an abject failure. We're not going to do basically the same thing now (but with a team of dogs and some rented helicopters) and suddenly produce a different result. We're never going to address the problem from this side of the border as long as we continue to believe there's no real problem. You see the problem? It takes "a foreign power" to raise the problem as a real problem.
We are never going to address our laws benefiting the ease of criminal activity, never going to improve our intelligence gathering capability in this area of concern. We will continue undermining cooperative and domestic police investigations, continue sweeping evidence of political collusion under the rug of denialism, continue allowing money laundering, terrorist financing, and whitewashing our global role in all of this. Why change? There's really no problem, we're told.
This is exactly why intelligence agencies from all members of Five Eyes consider Canada not just a joke of a responsible country but an untrustworthy and unworthy ally (see Sam Cooper's excellent and devastating ongoing reporting and committee testimony on mounting decades-long evidence of increasing Canadian culpability in all of this). Because the problem IS real.
Sure, it would be lovely if Canada altered course and, sure, it would great if we had the national cahones to become a responsible and trusted ally to those with whom we are in military and security alliances rather than hostile governments dedicated to our destruction, but to pretend our collaboration with terrorist organizations and hostile foreign governments used to harm the US should not earn US enmity and a hostile response is, I think, proto-typical Canadian delusion. It's just another gross misunderstanding that there is even a problem that isn't a figment of Trump's imagination. (This is TDS in action.) Believing this false narrative over what's true helps gloss over Canada's ongoing delusion that we're still the Good Guys. We're not. At best, we're just naïve dupes. When such a 'not a problem' is allowed to fester and grow for decades, I think a stronger argument aligns Canada as a nation has become a criminal collaborator. And that is going to carry a very serious response. My belief? Gird thy loins.
Great column. I’m no fan of Ford exactly but if he were the federal Con leader, I would vote for him in an election. He knows how to stand up to a bully.
Do you live in Ontario? Doug Ford is mostly an incompetent disaster who only stays in power due to running effectively unopposed against parties that split the remainder of the vote almost perfectly in half. That and the fact that the media don't care who wins in Ontario so don't apply the Liberal = good Con = bad narrative. Not that Doug is a conservative 90% of the time.
He can say about Trump whatever his pollsters think will play best with voters because he doesn't have to actually negotiate with him. Mark Carney is pulled in two directions on that particular problem, as would whoever might be Canadian PM including Ford in the unlikely event he gained that office - appease the voters by talking tough, while appeasing Trump so he doesn't do too much damage before he hopefully gets politically neutered at the end of 2026.
Check out the frantic narrative during any national election that appears on the front page of every newspaper that isn't explicitly right-wing, and all the TV news. Excusing or forgetting every example of Liberal corruption and mismanagement and blowing up every minor CPC gaffe into a disqualifying event. It's almost like they are trying to preserve millions of dollars in subsidies or something.
Media coverage of Ontario elections are basically "this is boring and dumb, who cares about platforms, they are all bad, vote however you want".
Oh the Ontario Liberals would be even worse. They would be Doug Ford with different scandals and even more results-free spending. The NDP would be an extinction level event for Ontario's economy. There are truly no good options.
Hi Jen, yes this really is a Kobayashi Maru "no win scenerio." So why are we still playing ? It's obvious that Trump and the Team don't want a deal, and wouldn't honour one even if they said yes to one. Seriously, just quietly recall the negotiators, Dom Le Blanc has an additional file to straighten out the interprovincial barriers, so let him work on that , it's way more productive than kissing the Trump Teams ass. And Carney can continue to look for more trade partners. Just walk away from Washington, because a years worth of "negotiating" hasn't gotten us anything except a few punches in the face.
Following the In The Shadows Cabinet of people around Prime Minister is instructive to how things are playing out.
Mr. Bremmer, President of the Eurasia Group predicted long ago that the inflammatory rhetoric of Trump had raised the slumbering nationalist streak of Canadians and that Canadian politicians would take advantage of it by putting up a fight before the election. Mr. Bremmer concluded that he "expected Canada would quietly fold shortly after the vote to ensure that the ongoing negotiations with the US remain functional."
If Ms. Gerson wonders whether Carney really believed in the elbows up narrative of the election campaign, well there's the answer. In fact Carney was removing counter tariffs imposed by Trudeau during the campaign and most of them have been quietly removed since, but not before reeling in a billion or two from Canadians unfortunate enough to buy US goods while the tariffs were still in place.
Canadians settled on a risk averse technocrat to lead us through the wilderness of the Trump Administration, failing to consider that bankers are not hard wired to take chances or stand tall above the bulwarks waiting to become Donald Trump cannon fodder.
The early going seems to justify the old sentiment that the Liberals are great at getting elected, governing...not so much.
I was willing to give him a period of grace and the benefit of the doubt - and I don't regret that - but this, yes. JG
"Mr. Bremmer, President of the Eurasia Group predicted long ago that the inflammatory rhetoric of Trump had raised the slumbering nationalist streak of Canadians and that Canadian politicians would take advantage of it by putting up a fight before the election. Mr. Bremmer concluded that he "expected Canada would quietly fold shortly after the vote to ensure that the ongoing negotiations with the US remain functional.""
I pointed this article out to many people during the election but it fell on deaf ears. This was 100% Carney's view and plan. The rhetoric was obvious garbage. I'm not even sure this approach is wrong, but it is the opposite of the BS that got the Boomers frothing like lunatics at those ridiculous "elbows up" rallies.
As a ‘Boomer’ who wouldn’t vote for reckless spending Liberals and knowing few other Boomers who would I want a polling firm to determine where these Boomers reside, because it isn’t in the West.
Oh, I think I know some in Saskatchewan, Alberta, and BC. I'm guessing you don't move in the same circles. Also, the thing about Boomer support for the Liberals isn't that it's monolithic, it's just that a bit over 50% of them favor the Liberals. That sticks out when it's the Conservatives who have plurality support in all other age categories at the moment.
All over the GTA!
I think you are right, but I see a lot from the Atlantic that have bought the Liberal propaganda.
Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver.
Toranna as well.
I know a few out west that voted Carney (I keep thinking Art, not Mark).
That gave away your age ;-).
Check the Eurasia Group staff… Mrs Carney, Gerry Butts, Evan Solomon…
Can we stop calling Carney a Conservative PM now also. This budget was just more LPC rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. “Elbows up” my ass!
All I care about is results, and the ad did not help make Canadian’s lives better. I don’t need government to be my moral inspiration, they need to provide infrastructure and make laws and regulations that protect the interest of Canadians, and enforce those laws and regulations.
Ok, let’s play with that idea. If all you’re looking for is an easy life and a government that provides infrastructure, laws, and regulation, then why be Canadian at all? What if someone makes the argument that you’d be richer as an American; that all your metrics around regulation and laws would be the same or better. Why bother fighting at all? Why be a Canadian as opposed to any other thing? JG
Indeed. That last question about 'why be Canadian' should not be rhetorical but seriously and deeply considered. I wonder how many could come up with a compelling, rational, evidence-based answer? I haven't heard or read one in the last decade or more and I'm always looking but I am inundated with emotive, delusional, and empty rhetoric recalling of past glories that (apparently) can never resurface as modern policy or made manifest through achievements because, you know, 'nice'. Now that Canada has successfully rewritten our history into being a genocidal criminal people and all current and future development of natural resources is a crime against humanity, why... the future looks golden!
I too wonder how many could come up with such an answer. I'd bet 8-out-of-10 would land on some version of, "we're not like those yucky Americans because - pick at least one - health care/guns/obnoxious/crass".
Trump II should have served as the much-needed kick in our ass to get our act together. Instead we have spent almost a full year fretting about what he says/does despite the fact that he is totally unpredictable and therefore impossible to "manage". It sounds crazy to say this about the President of the USA because obviously his actions impact us but, due to his unpredictability/volatility, he is, in essence, reduced to nothing more than a distraction. Should we kiss his ass or have our elbows up? It is impossible to know!! And yet, hardly a week goes by without fretting about him through this lens.
The only way to deal with him is to make this country economically strong. Yet this fretting has gone on for almost a year and as far as I can tell we are still no closer to getting our natural resources out of the ground than we were on the fateful night Junior put his foot in his mouth at Mara-Lago. And WRT Supply Management, the lowest of impossibly low-hanging fruit, we continue to (seemingly PROUDLY!!!!) cling to it like a man thrown a 50 pound boulder in the middle of the ocean. It is to weep.
I'm in total agreement about Trump. He's more like a slow-moving natural disaster that needs to be endured than something we can control. Batten down the hatches, fill the sandbags, hope for the best, and maybe now isn't the time to worry too much about how much Co2 we are generating. Other than that focus on ourselves and don't even worry about him day to day.
The most damage he's done has been by re-writing out politics to keep the Liberals in power, likely on purpose as a way to keep us weak and divided. I liken it to the insane way the US reacted to 9/11 being worse than the disaster itself.
To misquote Don Cherry, "how many Canadians will be wearing poppies this year?"
Fewer and fewer folks care about Canada. We seem to have been lessened by our politicians and ideologies.
Lest we forget has already been forgotten by so many so-called (and hyphenated - a term I used back in the early 70s in Maclean's) Canadians with every Hamas-supporting demonstration and the mewling response from every level of government and every institution that has gone along to get along with the Islamofascist, progressive lies and deceits and apologies that support them. This is how liberal democracy dies, incrementally, one small rationalized defeat at a time, capitulating to the mob and ignoring/undermining both principled liberal values and respect for what's true.
Hyphenated-citizens of convenience using the country as a hotel (as per Ms. Wente). What's not to like?
There is no such thing as a Canadian, which is why no-one can answer that question.
The problem is that the only sensible answer, "Canadians are a people", completely contradicts bien-pensant Liberal views in immigration and assimilation and calls for massive remigration.
You know, it's funny. It IS hard to describe what it means to be Canadian.
And... I sure do get offended when I'm travelling and I'm mistaken as American...
So what do I think makes me Canadian? Here's a few thoughts:
Tolerance of diversity - yup, despite the racism that exists here, I think we are pretty tolerant of differences between people. I was at IKEA the other day picking up a few things, and there were so many people from so many different places all doing the same as me: picking up some things to make my home work better or at least offer me some Scandinavian swagger, eating the meatballs with fries and gravy, and slurping a frozen yogurt for dessert. Around me were women in hijabs, a few ladies in saris, ladies in dresses with bright African prints on them, guys speaking Spanish and Arabic and French etc, and me in my jeans and ball cap. Just a normal day at IKEA. Nobody was bothering anyone. So yeah, tolerance, that's one.
My second suggestion is respect for the rule of law... despite our blatent habit of speeding and disregard of a few other traffic laws, I'd say that for the most part, we still believe in the rule of law. And in queueing up and not budding in. That's a thing... we get very irate when people bud into a line.
As a people, we're pretty aware of the international scene. Given we've all got friends and family all around the world, we keep track of world events because they affect us and they affect people we love. I do think this is a national characteristic.
Canadians are generous and it comes out in funny ways. Mostly around Christmas when we also give room for other seasonal celebrations because we don't want to be rude or cause offense.
We follow the weather. It's a huge topic of discussion. Maybe other peoples do this too, but it's a national pastime here.
And finally, if I'm off the road in a snowstorm, I know that someone will stop and see if I'm ok. I've had that happen, and I've done it for others. We push each other out of snowbanks when needed.
Ok, I'm alluding to values we share - diversity, tolerance, respect, awareness of and concern for others, generosity, connection, queueing, and the weather... maybe that's a start? ;-)
Sounds very British...
Nobody who isn't calling for remigration of millions of temporary residents really has any business expecting people to make sacrifices to remain "Canadian".
If we are merely a paperwork nation, why wouldn't we support becoming American, if that makes us better off?
And if we are a people, how on earth could it be sane to admit 5 million foreigners, almost all from the third world, in just a few years?
I wouldn't characterize that comment as "looking for an easy life". Perhaps it is a recognition that the biggest threat to Canada is currently economic. Our young people cannot buy homes to raise a family. Our standard of living is slipping, and all the leading indicators (business investment, tax code changes, deregulation) are stalled. If we want to continue to have a country, or want to raise a new generation that even still believes in this country, we need to get results. Dumb ads, that make us feel good, don't get results.
Right now Canadians need to eliminate the countless laws and regulations that are harmful to the interests of Canadians, before they even think of new ones. Then look to the civil service jobs that can be eliminated as a result.
I completely agree, but that's just evading the original point. JG
Oops I got caught in the indent trap. I meant to reply to Trevor’s point not yours. I agree with your point. But to me being Canadian (or anything else) is a state of mind and a shared value system.
INDENTS *shakes fist* JG
My read on "value system" is culture. So expand upon the important features of Canada's culture.
I may be idealistic. My own view is freedom of expression, accept all opinions without necessary believing in them, live and let live. Freedom OF religion not FROM religion like in Quebec. A moral code regardless of source. Golden rule. Right to property and life and the access to tools to defend them. Honor those whose shoulders you stand on.
The Quebec example is about working as an agent of the public but imposing personal beliefs into such public roles that have nothing to do with religion. People in Quebec are free to practice their religion in whatever private domains they inhabit. But to import such personal religious beliefs into public roles and express them there as if part of that role is both selfish and rude and a form of evangelizing those who must participate in the public domain. Why should your child be subjected daily to the personal religious beliefs of their public school teacher? Why should a police officer present him- or herself to the public as a believer of this or that religious affiliation? Does doing so help or hinder that officer enforcing the law? This is where uniforms are meant to remove the private beliefs and preferences of the individual wearing it not because it's a freedom-from issue but rather an intentional statement of state neutrality necessary FOR freedom of.
Have we given Carney enough time yet to prove he's not who he (and mostly his handlers and the media) told us he was?
Do we realize now that electing an individual who ditched Canada for better opportunities 10 years earlier, with no political record, vague promises, and no clear idea how he would or would not govern, might have been a bad idea?
Oops.
Well sounds like we are about to be stuck with him for at least another 3.5 years thanks to "anything to win" Liberal ethos and spineless Red Tory floor crossers.
‘Red’ Tories were always socially progressive while being fiscally conservative. Don’t see how this translates to supporting a very socially progressive and over spending Liberal government.
That's a generous interpretation. Many are actual and wannabe career politicians with no strong opinions who will just go with whatever makes getting elected easiest. This is a natural fit for Liberals because that's sort of their central philosophy. But sometimes you can't clinch that Liberal nomination or live somewhere that having a blue sign with your face on it is the easier path to victory.
Spot on, Jen. I agree with you. I was stunned when Carney apologized-have to admit that I thought it wasn’t true at first. My worry is growing that Carney doesn’t get why he was elected. We need a principled leader, not an economist, right now.
The best argument for Alberta separatists yet!
We'll agree to disagree. Trump is nuts, and any deal signed with him is about as meaningful as Hitler and Stalin's non-aggression pact. However, why not attempt to lower the temperature? The ad accomplished more than Doug could have hoped for. But did it help relations? No, not really. I think Carney played politics, which is what we hired him to do. He played the sucker with an ego-appeasing, insincere apology to lower the temperature. Politics is a game. The long game is better.
Trump never apologizes because he thinks apologies are for losers. Carney has put a big "Kick Me" sign on our back. From now on, Trump will oblige.
Trump has been kicking us nonstop since his first term. This won't change anything.
Well… we had Trudeau in his first term. The “kick me” sign was definitely present there still.
Trudeau was a complete and total disaster. Probably the worst PM ever. But it's not his fault he won.
Ms Gerson, i dont subscribe to only hear commentary i agree with, but here you've channelled my views to a T. Felt good to read.
This is why I subscribe to the line: to read AngryJen's™ acerbic and oh-so pointed criticism our complacency and risk-aversion.
And also to know that the Trekkie conversion is complete. When Jen makes reference to Trek's Kobayashi Maru all by herself, we all know what's really going on.
Wasn't me! Was just happy to see it.
Carney is far from the only leader who has apologized to, flattered or otherwise kowtowed (or seemed to, in the moment) in the face of tantrums emanating from the shambolic White House. It's become a recognisable and likely understandable ritual. Apologise, and/or flatter and/or back down (or appear to do so), and try to get back on track. Zelenskyy is perhaps the model for doing this, not because he wanted to, but because it's the only way to deal with Trump.
I'm not precisely defending Carney, and agree that Ford, despite his many failings, is really the one who deserves an apology in this specific instance. I just don't think any other party leader in the PM's shoes would have done differently when it came down to it.
P.S. There are many reasons to be unhappy with Carney / the federal liberals, but until the Opposition gets itself a capable leader, things aren't going to get better.
I think you're missing the point.
We look weak because we are weak - not because Mark Carney is saying the wrong things. Doug pretends to be strong, but he isn't. Mark pretends he has a good hand to play, but he doesn't. You pretend there is a winning way to play a losing hand, but there isn't.
This is about minimizing our losses. No one likes Trump. He was, is, and always will be, a jerk. But he can hurt us more then we can hurt him, and we need to remember this.
For me this was a huge self own
Exactly, we are the flea in bed with the elephant!
The Carneyage will continue until voters Poilievre (pronounced pull-the- lever).
I laughed in dad pun. JG
Overall, I like the tone and intention of the post. But it does contain something fairly typical in so many discussions about the state of Canada that I think is worth contending.
One of the great failings Canada has committed certainly throughout the 21st Century - both institutionally and by the majority of its people - is that the country has warmly embraced the notion that believing in fictions justifies presenting them as if facts. Jen has done the same here thinking it bolsters her case ("...the overblown fiction of a [fentanyl] crisis") about Canadian independence from it suzerain status with the US. I disagree strongly. I think just the opposite is the case here.
In fact, the core idea that "Canada should preserve the right to determine for itself how much of a problem these things actually are, and to devote resources according to our assessment, not that of a foreign power," is exactly what has placed us in the (for now) economic crosshairs of the world's dominant superpower as an unserious country with our outstanding and repeatedly demonstrated failure to believe in the preponderance of overwhelming contrary evidence of a narrative. We have fooled ourselves with our own fiction. It is a fiction, and shown to be such, only BY the victim of our delusion, namely, the foreign power we call the US and its multiple state and federal agencies that can show just adversely affected by our failures to understand the problem and act responsibly has been. And why our response to our own guilt is spectacularly insufficient. We don't respond appropriately because we BELIEVE - as Jen assures us - that it's the problem and not our response that is the (largely) fiction! This raises a rather important question: Why should we as a state believe any differently when we continue to allow belief in some fictional narrative to trump compelling evidence from reality? (I'll bet you can start to name other fictional narratives that have also redefined Canada and reduced our standing in the world that long predate Trump...).
Being assured we - as patriots, of course - should substitute our preferred fictional narrative that we're not (much of) a problem to the US is not helpful because it's not truthful. What's lost by repeating this narrative is any public awareness of just how much of a SOURCE of the problem Canada has become for the United States specifically and the west generally. Fentanyl supply in thousands of kilos (billions of lethal doses) is just one small branch of the problem. In reality, we play a key role in being China's (and the Cartels') backdoor to the US - especially with drug precursors, drugs themselves, and massive associated money laundering and other financial services - that advances hostile foreign powers like China and Iran harming the US as well as ourselves. Pretending otherwise, that the problem must be determined by domestic intelligence rather than states victimized by our refusal to even recognize the scope of the problem we play (which, in spite of best efforts by those in woefully inadequate Canadian law enforcement, consistently yields compromised and dropped multinational investigations with no real changes in practice, no meaningful convictions, but a country known as a favoured state for harbouring transnational criminals under the Canadian passport), is simply a non starter because it has been tried for decades and is an abject failure. We're not going to do basically the same thing now (but with a team of dogs and some rented helicopters) and suddenly produce a different result. We're never going to address the problem from this side of the border as long as we continue to believe there's no real problem. You see the problem? It takes "a foreign power" to raise the problem as a real problem.
We are never going to address our laws benefiting the ease of criminal activity, never going to improve our intelligence gathering capability in this area of concern. We will continue undermining cooperative and domestic police investigations, continue sweeping evidence of political collusion under the rug of denialism, continue allowing money laundering, terrorist financing, and whitewashing our global role in all of this. Why change? There's really no problem, we're told.
This is exactly why intelligence agencies from all members of Five Eyes consider Canada not just a joke of a responsible country but an untrustworthy and unworthy ally (see Sam Cooper's excellent and devastating ongoing reporting and committee testimony on mounting decades-long evidence of increasing Canadian culpability in all of this). Because the problem IS real.
Sure, it would be lovely if Canada altered course and, sure, it would great if we had the national cahones to become a responsible and trusted ally to those with whom we are in military and security alliances rather than hostile governments dedicated to our destruction, but to pretend our collaboration with terrorist organizations and hostile foreign governments used to harm the US should not earn US enmity and a hostile response is, I think, proto-typical Canadian delusion. It's just another gross misunderstanding that there is even a problem that isn't a figment of Trump's imagination. (This is TDS in action.) Believing this false narrative over what's true helps gloss over Canada's ongoing delusion that we're still the Good Guys. We're not. At best, we're just naïve dupes. When such a 'not a problem' is allowed to fester and grow for decades, I think a stronger argument aligns Canada as a nation has become a criminal collaborator. And that is going to carry a very serious response. My belief? Gird thy loins.
Thank You for this. I am not a very strong writer and you have elaborated my thoughts into words.
Way too long, I know, but important to understand a perspective - and why it matters - not often considered. Thanks.
Lead. Follow or get out of the way.
Great column. I’m no fan of Ford exactly but if he were the federal Con leader, I would vote for him in an election. He knows how to stand up to a bully.
None of these other clowns do.
Do you live in Ontario? Doug Ford is mostly an incompetent disaster who only stays in power due to running effectively unopposed against parties that split the remainder of the vote almost perfectly in half. That and the fact that the media don't care who wins in Ontario so don't apply the Liberal = good Con = bad narrative. Not that Doug is a conservative 90% of the time.
He can say about Trump whatever his pollsters think will play best with voters because he doesn't have to actually negotiate with him. Mark Carney is pulled in two directions on that particular problem, as would whoever might be Canadian PM including Ford in the unlikely event he gained that office - appease the voters by talking tough, while appeasing Trump so he doesn't do too much damage before he hopefully gets politically neutered at the end of 2026.
I for one am glad that the Ontario media doesn't apply the "Liberal = good, Con = bad" narrative. Although I'm not sure that's actually the case.
Check out the frantic narrative during any national election that appears on the front page of every newspaper that isn't explicitly right-wing, and all the TV news. Excusing or forgetting every example of Liberal corruption and mismanagement and blowing up every minor CPC gaffe into a disqualifying event. It's almost like they are trying to preserve millions of dollars in subsidies or something.
Media coverage of Ontario elections are basically "this is boring and dumb, who cares about platforms, they are all bad, vote however you want".
Oh the Ontario Liberals would be even worse. They would be Doug Ford with different scandals and even more results-free spending. The NDP would be an extinction level event for Ontario's economy. There are truly no good options.
Great column Jen
Hi Jen, yes this really is a Kobayashi Maru "no win scenerio." So why are we still playing ? It's obvious that Trump and the Team don't want a deal, and wouldn't honour one even if they said yes to one. Seriously, just quietly recall the negotiators, Dom Le Blanc has an additional file to straighten out the interprovincial barriers, so let him work on that , it's way more productive than kissing the Trump Teams ass. And Carney can continue to look for more trade partners. Just walk away from Washington, because a years worth of "negotiating" hasn't gotten us anything except a few punches in the face.