90 Comments

"si vis pacem para bellum" (if you want peace, prepare for war), has been good advice for over 2500 years.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Then we have to disagree. You, George and me.

Expand full comment

Switzerland is always prepared for war, but is never attacked.

Saddam Hussein's preparations for war brought on an attack.

Canada is not very prepared for war, but has not been attacked in 208 years.

Offhand, I'd say that the "prepared for war" thing is just one of multiple variables, like whether you are worth attacking, and how hard it is to attack you

Expand full comment

Switzerland has geography as its primary defence, Saddam invaded another country which was the first domino to his Putin like demise, and we haven't been invaded but have had our ships sunk in the Gulf of St Lawrence. I love those who are panicked by t the idea of a world government not realising that it meant the end of the need for mass militaries and nuclear weapons. Trillions could be saved every year.

Expand full comment

I have one problem with a world government… accountability.

Expand full comment

Oh, it will never happen, and all dictatorships eventually end like Mussolini. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. We're seeing that, again, in Russia now.

Expand full comment

Yeah, you've named some of those other "variables". (Canada's geography is also our defense, of course. )

Trade webs might create 'one world' where it's economically crazy to attack anybody else, but we're learning you can only safely trade with democracies, at least for vital supplies.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

LOL, the problem is Putin, Jinping and some others are not really concerned about the affordability of war, (or Putin would have already packed it in).

Also, believe it or not, they aren't terribly concerned with carbon emissions; and they are huge emitters!

So, where does that leave us... waste our time fighting climate change until we are so economically and militarily weak, we are taken over. And then our new rulers will jack up the emissions anyway.

“You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.” -Leon Trotsky

Expand full comment

In a perfect world, but we don't live in that. As for it's affordability, being prepared for any event (take your pick), should always be more economical than not being so. Especially war.

Expand full comment
Apr 8, 2022·edited Apr 8, 2022

Spot on, Matt.

If I had money for every time someone said to me that "China has changed under Xi Jinping's leadership" or "the United States would never opt for a less democratic political process" (despite all the evidence to the contrary), I could buy a retirement home in Nova Scotia and live there with the loveliest of amenities and sail to my heart's content.

Too often we hear nostrums (from the Mandarins and politicians in Ottawa--and the big business titans on Bay Street or in the C-suites of fossil fuel firms in Calgary) about how "X" (war, pandemic) is unlikely to happen ("we don't plan on the basis of alarmist thinking about 'black swan' events, don't you know")?

Or that "Y" (the overriding importance of "economic imperatives") justifies the purchase of cotton and consumer goods made using indentured labour in China, or the sale of telecoms know-how to China for use in the country's mass surveillance system, or the "irreplaceable" importance of China's markets for our Canola and other products.

Not to mention the sale of armoured personnel carriers to the theocracy in Saudi Arabia (because that creates "jobs" in Southwestern Ontario).

Complacency and arrogance go together, they say, but I say that laziness has a lot to do with it, as well.

Canadians are at fault for shirking our responsibility as citizens to "give a shit" about complex foreign, defence and economic policy issues (and press governments more effectively to pay more attention to things that matter--like ethical conduct and long-term consequences).

Many of us don't even bother to vote (much less engage their elected representatives to have discussions about something other than kitchen renovations and nuisance dogs).

Is it any surprise, then, when our political leaders (and our senior public servants) turn out to be such airheads?

Expand full comment

Amen to that.

Expand full comment

Great read and very timely following the federal budget. It appears that the defence department will again have to make due with some pocket change so expanded social programs can perhaps shelter us from life’s realities outside of the political fantasy land. Keep those heads buried firmly in the sand Ottawa.

Expand full comment

I think there are two things going on here.

The first is the debate on whether its better to use carrots or sticks with geopolitical competitors like Russia and China -- whether pursuding them via access to markets and foreign investment is a better long-term strategy than containing them economically and militarily. Russia really does shift that debate as they have a LOT of carrots to lose, which does defy what has been conventional wisdom up until now.

The second is Canadian's desire to not spend tax dollars on things that don't provide near-term benefits to oneself. So, we're really excited about more free services (child care, dental) or new tax cuts, but when we're asked to invest in longer-term initiatives (sustainable health care, military) it's like asking a kid to eat their vegetables. Going back to my point above, using carrots is only effective if you reserve the right to move to sticks -- we banked that carrots would be enough, which was a rather silly bet.

Good read!

Expand full comment
author

I'm all for using carrots, Tony, but I'd like to have a stick handy all the same.

Expand full comment
Apr 8, 2022·edited Apr 8, 2022

My sentiments exactly. Two examples of other pet peeves of mine include:

A) our goal of transitioning to green energy, without our politicians and most citizens having any grasp as to how much infrastructure (dependant on fossil fuels) needs to be built and how long it will take. People think all is needed is to 'flip the switch'. Virtually no one is changing their lifestyle, Canada's Green Party is on life support, and Saudi Arabia (as one example) has started a second airline to handle the increase in Hajj and tourist traffic. I suggest people listen to Australian Prof Peter Batterham on John Anderson's YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oIkKb7FDNg&t=83s, and read the article about how wind turbine blades have a short lifespan and can't be recycled. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-02-05/wind-turbine-blades-can-t-be-recycled-so-they-re-piling-up-in-landfills.

B) The cost of housing - buying or renting. Builders say they make no money building small places, and we Canadians insist we NEED these bigger homes. The new normal is to buy a place that costs 10-20 times your annual salary, while it used to cost 2-3 times.

I'm so glad I'm in my 70's and I won't have to deal with these issues for much longer. And I apologize to future generations how we failed you so much.

Expand full comment

I'd suggest looking at Not Just Bikes on YouTube, he does a really good job exploring the failure of city design in NA.

Many in my generation of 20 something would happily live in dense walkable communities. Cities supported by NIMBYs have made communities like that impossible.

If I need a car to do everything might at least go further out and get more space.

Expand full comment

I love the ones about the Netherlands, seeing as my family is Dutch. Holland is flat. Beautifully flat. But I always have to shake my head as so much in BC is either straight up hill or straight back down and everyone here must be decked out in painfully cool, bright togs. For all of that I am amazed that as many people actually do bike here on the wet coast. Thanks for the heads up, I've not checked it in a while.

Expand full comment

I have a very slim, fit 74 year old friend in The Netherlands. She cycles about two hours every day to do her errands and socializing.

Expand full comment
Apr 10, 2022·edited Apr 10, 2022

AAC: Again, I plead blindness as I did not see your comments until 18 hours after you posted it.

I agree that the design of North American cities is very much dominated by NIMBYs. I think that is quite normal - if regrettable! After all, it is quite all right if YOUR ox is gored but do not even think about MY ox being gored. Foolish? Clearly, but that is the way of the world. The current design of cities was quite acceptable for a smaller population at a different time but that population and time is not now.

You identify yourself as being in your twenties; by contrast, I am in my seventies, so I do understand those who don't want to accept change. I don't want change - but change is actually quite normal so I have to deal with it as it comes.

In fact, it seems to me that the NIMBY folks depend on zoning laws and the like to keep single family homes as being the norm in their particular neighborhood. In turn, that drives up the cost of housing which absolutely impacts the children and grandchildren of those NIMBYs. "Your kids can't afford a home? Why, it's not MY fault; THE GOVENMENT SHOULD DO SOMETHING!!!"

The truth is, we are all the government and the NIMBY attitude, whether it be with respect to zoning, location of utility corridors, etc., etc. is something that YOU and YOUR GENERATION must deal with by DEALING with YOUR PARENTS' GENERATION. Tell your parents / aunts / uncles / grandparents / etc. that they are PERSONALLY making it impossible for you to own your own home; above all, emphasize their PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Then, when you get zoning, etc. to be more flexible, you can work for more densification if that is your wish. But, first, the zoning.

Expand full comment

Thanks. I used to listen to James Kunstler. https://kunstler.com/. He's a supporter of "New Urbanism", and he isn't a fan of suburbs and their excessive use of cars and gas. I like the idea of New Urbanism, (focusing on high-density 3-4 floor buildings), with a central hub with rings of roads going around the hub and expanding outwards. Everyone should be able to walk or take a bus that is only 10 minutes away from their daily needs - work, school, medical, culture, etc. He would also support some of Jane Jacobs's ideas about people knowing their neighbours and recognizing strangers, thus reducing crime.

Expand full comment

Amen, Sandra. In particular, I agree with your last sentence as it is my own situation and feeling.

Expand full comment

You, Ken, David and the others likely have decades of contributions left to make. But, now that you mention it, I am in my seventh decade--just a little ahead of David.

Expand full comment

About to turn 60. Couldn't agree more.

Expand full comment

Puppies.

Expand full comment

Except for the few million who are imprisoned, tortured, organ-harvested or otherwise deprived, we are too comfortable sitting on our comfy sofas, watching the world evolve on our 55-inch tv. To think that we will all rise up to make the world a safe place to live is one dream too far. I have asked this many times: where are the great leaders that will inspire us to do great things?

Expand full comment

Excellent stuff. Perspective is paramount. For instance, re lifting of Covid restrictions……in all Canadian provinces, the “lifting” is to restart or accelerate the economy. It is not about health, but to accelerate the economy, so a few thousand deaths of immune-compromised people or seniors is just a trifle and not as important as the economy. I am not being a smart-ass cynic. This is reality.

Expand full comment

First rate, Matt. History marches on, as does mostly unchanging human nature. Amazing how many have forgotten, or ignored, or (most ominously) tried to deny/obscure these facts of life. The latter are the most insidious, as they put us all at risk. There would appear to be far too many of them at present. Thanks for shining your journalistic light on facts that were hidden from so many - in plain sight.

Expand full comment

I can't think of a single comment made in this article with which I disagree, but the problem is really much broader than described.

While I have no wish to be described as an apologist for a tyrant, Putin's invasion of Ukraine is not the first violation of what people describe as "International Law" or "the post-war world order", nor is it the first time a Security Council Veto-holding power has illegally invaded another country. Other "lesser" powers have also violated the principle of not seeking to conquer a neighbour or seize territory, or wage war except in self-defence when attacked, it's just that we have normalized it or considered it OK as long as one of our friends is committing the violation.

The perfectly legitimate accusations of "War Criminal" made against Putin can be equally applied, for example, to the authors of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, an act not authorized by the UN, and supported by wishful thinking, self-deception, outright lies, and, of course, by a conviction that if "We" do it, it MUST be all right.

The 1967 Israeli-Arab War was also a war of choice, designed to seize territory, executed under the guise of "self-defense" when Nassar's bellicose rhetoric and Military posturing offered Israel a golden opportunity to do what it had intended to do for many years. Multiple violations of international Law continue, always protected by the Security Council Veto of the USA.

Numerous other examples of violations of international law and simple human decency abound, too plentiful to list.

While I applaud the support given Ukraine by the West, and feel the sanctions imposed on Putin's Russia are absolutely justified, we should not be too smug in our hypocrisy.

Expand full comment

Absolutely. W is no different than Vlad.

Expand full comment

You're a freeking genius...and thanks for the perspective. After the last 6 years, everything I thought I understood about humanity can now be written in foot-high letters on the head of a pin.

Expand full comment

I think we all get there in the end.

Expand full comment

Well written. The Canadian perspective is that we need to encourage “everyone” to do the right thing. Of course, we feel we know what that is and they only need to listen to our words (cause that’s all we have folks) and all will be well. What we fail to understand is “everyone” is doing what they feel is the right thing from their perspective and we are gobsmacked when something like Russia attacking Ukraine happens. Really???Putin has been empire building for sometime and killing off his rivals. Continuing down a path that is working for him is no surprise. He probably has a team that makes GIFS of Trudeaus speeches so they can laugh at him. The naive performance we have of a government so out of its league on the world stage speaks for itself.

Expand full comment

The gov't prior to this one cut military spending and closed the only Canadian facility that could produce vaccines...I am proud of this government & when I go abroad they are mentioned with respect. We even have a Deputy PM who speaks Russian (& Ukrainian), holds degrees from Harvard & Oxford, worked for the Financial Times & knows exactly what is going on in Russia.

Expand full comment

I think this government did very well on COVID. A new leader could make me proud of it.

Expand full comment

As always, Matt, a top-notch column; skillfully written and well considered.

Thank you, Sir.

Expand full comment

All true of course. But I think it would be accurate to say that world, and all its constituent parts, "evolves", and that what we are seeing part of that natural evolution. Geopolitics has evolved, our relationship with the Russia that came out of the USSR has evolved, our relationship with China has evolved, and all the other moving parts. And not in a good way. Same with Covid. Laboratories played with gain of function experiments, which led to a virus escape, which led to unsafe and ineffective vaccines, which led to government imposed "vaccine passports" to exert control over the population, which will likely evolve to Digital IDs and Central Bank Digital Currencies. All sold to us as more "safety and security" when really they are more centralized control. The world is certainly evolving, and right now that evolution is pointing to a darker future.

Expand full comment

C'mon Tim. Everything you wrote after "Laboratories played with gain of function ..." is -- at best -- a bunch of unproven theories. Maybe they are theories you believe, but stating them as fact is a bit disingenuous. Or, if you think these are accepted fact, I'd suggest broadening your sources.

Expand full comment

https://youtu.be/GG32f-OU9p4

Expand full comment

Right from the opening statement..."no definitive proof". And since regardless of what they find, it won't change anything, it doesn't really matter anymore. China isn't going to pay reparations for a mistake from someone who would now definitely be dead, and the world isn't going to war over it. So we're stuck with it. Unless you have an alternate solution.

Expand full comment

You need to read this or watch the you tube video about the article. It exposes the corruption through out those Institutions we rely on to keep us safe. It’s about Eco Health being just as guilty in their actions in the backing of this kind of research and the misinformation and propaganda being pushed by those in high places to keep it hushed up. It’s mind boggling and shows the corruption is deep and through out.

I just learned that the bio weapon labs in Ukraine do not exist and that it was propaganda by the US Government to frighten the Russians. Really? It shows you that many in the mainstream propogate knowingly and to be ware of what you believe regardless who is saying it. Then they have the audacity to say its the You Tubers spreading the misinformation. I will take the word of Glen Greenwald over any paid for mainstream media that is beholden to the Governments for bail out money. I am Leary of all information as it’s not just the US doing this it’s all the countries. They are forming the narrative whether it’s purposeful to mislead Russia is one thing but to mislead citizens of your own country is another. It’s the reason the governments want the internet silenced and under their control as they are losing the narrative and so it’s deemed misinformation and conspiracy theories. So far it’s been the internet that has nailed the stories and when it can no longer be hidden the mainstream will put it on.

Expand full comment

We don't need to "solve" it. We need to see what is really going on, so we aren't sucked in to more "misinformation" from the authorities. And it is rampant.

Expand full comment

There is plenty of evidence for the statements I made, and to ignore it is perilous at best. It is clear that the world is evolving towards more centralized authority, more stripping of democratic rights, more suppression of dissent, more censoring of any debate of the government narrative. The evolution will likely continue, as that is the natural order of things. When the next crisis comes, likely economic, more tyranny is very likely to be imposed to provide us with "safety and security". It's been happening steadily since 9/11, and there is nothing to indicate it will suddenly stop.

Expand full comment

I'd suggest your statements on COVID are speculation at best. Thee are people investigating, and when they provide proof, that will get my attention. Until then, I'll leave it....like medical advice, in the hands of the experts.

If you want to look for a true stripping of democratic rights, look south. The economic crisis is already here.

Expand full comment

My comments on covid/vaccine are based on real data. Strong indications are already available, and authorities have been working hard to suppress or discredit it, but it's there. The government's "safe and effective" mantra is speculative and without any data provided to back it up. As for the stripping of democratic rights, no need to look any farther than our own backyard.

Expand full comment

You'll have to elaborate on what democratic rights we've lost. I haven't lost a thing. Almost every single person I've heard complaining about a loss of democratic rights also rejects the concept of social responsibility.

I'm so tired of all the criticism of the vaccines. Yes, they are not perfect, and each variant seems to dull their effectiveness. Have there been negative reactions? Absolutely. Have they saved our healthcare system from a complete and total collapse? That's a certainty for now. Everything you do every day comes with a certain amount of risk sadly. But with all the whining about masking, and getting vaccinated to travel, have you pondered where we'd be without them? In Ontario, the unvaccinated made up more than 50% of ICU cases when they were 10% of the population. Ponder where we'd be if 100% of the population was unvaccinated.

Expand full comment

This forum is probably the wrong place to provide a real answer to this comment. If you'd like to contact me directly, we can continue. I'll provide my email if you're interested.

Expand full comment
Apr 8, 2022·edited Apr 8, 2022

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi5-d78moX3AhUQIkQIHTqnDB8QFnoECAMQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vanityfair.com%2Fnews%2F2022%2F03%2Fthe-virus-hunting-nonprofit-at-the-center-of-the-lab-leak-controversy&usg=AOvVaw2dKxjJetTG7TKOLtetwazT I know you don’t think You Tube is news but the you Tube Channel The Hill, does a great story on the Vanity Fair article. I find it’s better explained there but you think only mainstream news are truth tellers so I put the Vanity Fair here as well.

Expand full comment

Let's suppose someone proves it came from the lab. What happens then?

Expand full comment

Hopefully, accountability. But in the absence of that, at least a realistic view of how information is being manipulated on behalf of the authorities.

Expand full comment

I think people speak about loss of democratic rights when they mean `things aren't going my way'.

Expand full comment

Well, if that's the case a lot of people will soon be feeling that "things aren't going their way". I think it's difficult to argue that democracy hasn't declined worldwide over the past few years, and the value of individual rights replaced with a narrative about "safety and security for the good of the whole", which is arguable at best and the refuge of budding tyrannies.

Expand full comment
Apr 10, 2022·edited Apr 10, 2022

Words similar to those said by our undemocratic, totalitarian, Prime Minister, after invoking the Emergencies act, sending in riot police, freezing bank accounts, throwing them in jail with no bail and no rights, as he spoke to world leaders in the EU Parliament. Something about the “slippage of democracy.” The man who himself took all Canadians rights and freedoms away and punished any who did not obey his dictate. The emergencies Act that was brought in due to untruths and hearsay pushed by his Corporate media that was false but used to put in the Emergency Act anyway. It shall remain to be seen if the Prime Minister and Singh knew it was lies but did not care, and put in the emergencies act regardless. No wonder Trudeau had to hold Singh’s hand or they both might end up charged and removed. The mayor of Ottawa, the past Liberal MP judge who presided over the bail hearing, the Police Chief in Ottawa, I guess we will find out their culpability in the court of law, if indeed they are able to speak truth. Considering Trudeau and Singh do not think Parliament is a place where that should occur, it best it’s done in a court of law, as it may be more difficult to purger themselves.

Expand full comment

Thank you. I was starting to think The Line was more narrow focused and less rejecting of bull shit. Matt you have renewed my faith.

Expand full comment

Spot on. Is it me, or are people burying their heads in the sand. FB & Twitter commentary or reactions are down to a dribble. It's like they are sick and tired of being disturbed. Shame.

Expand full comment

I remember thinking something similar on 9/11 - people were gobsmacked that terrorism could actually happen in America, and talked about the world had somehow suddenly changed. However, 1) there was no reason that such terrorist attacks *shouldn't* happen, and 2) they already had! The 9/11 attack was the 2nd terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. Everybody forgot about the 1993 attack with a truck bomb, which could've done some serious damage if it'd been placed near a structural pillar. People don't want to think about terrible things because they're horrible to contemplate. However, the world isn't like some Schroedinger's cat box where it's an indeterminate state until you look - not looking just means you get caught unaware of what might happen.

Expand full comment
author

I think I disagree with this. I was mulling over 9/11 and some other examples of things that really do/did change the world before I published the piece. The industrial revolution changed the world. The World Wars changed the world. I'm even happy to entertain pop cultural suggestions: the Beatles changed the world! Stuff like that. The 1993 vs. 2001 WTC attacks, I think, are on different levels. 1993 was terrible and then weirdly and fairly swiftly forgotten. 2001 altered the course of history, or at least I'd say so. I'd say 9/11 was a world changer.

Expand full comment

9/11 triggered a recognition of the problem and the resulting responses. The threat was already there. In addition to the 1993 bombings, there’s also been Khobar Towers, and the African embassy bombings, and the attack on the USS Cole. I thought your argument was that people are conflating their belated perception with the world changing, which seems to have been the case with 9/11: the threat was there, people just dismissed the impact until they couldn’t anymore.

Expand full comment
author

You're not wrong. You can see in my first comment, I hedged a bit — I THINK I disagree. I'm not totally sure you couldn't win me over, though. I think what I'd argue sets 9/11 apart was the novelty, both in method and impact. It was something we'd only barely thought of. I remember CNN, I think, interviewing Tom Clancy of all people, because he'd had a book that touched on a terror attack against the U.S. Capitol using a stolen jet.

Expand full comment

I agree with that - what set it apart was 1) it succeeded, and 2) killed a lot of people in a prominent location. The WTC part of the attack always overshadows the plane that hit the Pentagon. People died at the Pentagon, but it didn’t happen in the downtown core of a major city visible to millions.

Expand full comment

Speaking from south of the border, I'd add 3) it did to the U.S. what the U.S. has been doing to others for decades. My first coherent reaction on 9/11, once I understood what had happened, was "Chickens come home to roost." Needless to say, I didn't say that out loud except among a very, very small circle of friends. The spectacular failure of, and lack of coordination among, the various intelligence services was front and center for a while. So was the persecution of anyone who, to white USians, "looked Muslim."

Expand full comment