Meme - Carney as clown putting on makeup: "WE WILL GET AN EVEN BETTER TRADE DEAL WITH THE US"
"CANADA ALREADY HAS THE BEST TRADE DEAL WITH THE US"
"CUSMA BEING TERMINATED WILL HAVE MINIMAL ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON CANADA"
"THE NEW DEAL WE NEGOTIATED IS BAD, THIS IS PIERRE POILIEVRE'S FAULT"
Michael Higgins: Trade war was never about sovereignty | National Post - "It is unfortunate that the Liberal government is still refusing to reveal exactly what the U.S. was asking and why Canada felt unable to accept. Article content What we do know is that of the three examples that Carney cited on that Saturday as being a threat to our sovereignty one has been settled, and may never have been an issue, and we largely appear to agree on a second. Article content The third issue, tariff levels on medium and heavy-duty trucks is an outstanding irritant and a large one. The potential economic harm to Ontario especially is such that it is likely to have always been a red line for Canada. Article content Article content But tariffs on trucks isn’t a sovereignty issue, it’s a trade one and best dealt with at the negotiating table. Carney told Canadians, “We are masters of our destiny.” Fine, but we are not masters of the U.S. and if they want to impose tariffs, it may be unreasonable, unfair, uneconomic and ultimately disastrous, but that’s what a sovereign nation can do. Article content However, framing tariffs on trucks as an existential threat to Canada was never going to be enough for Liberals. Arguing over 25 per cent tariffs on medium and heavy trucks is a legitimate aim for trade negotiators but lacks the drama needed by a fiery prime minister to fire up Canada. Article content A week ago, a steadfast Carney warned that “America was trying to break us so they can own us and I promised that would never, never happen.” Article content If the backdrop to that was tariffs on trucks, then Carney might have been accused of being less Churchillian and more Shakespearean. Article content Hence, Carney introduced two other factors: the risk to our language and culture as well as our ability to make trade deals with other countries. Article content These are things to rile up the masses... Article content The risk to “our language, our culture, our sovereignty” was about discoverability rules, it was about whether streaming services should have to be subject to the abysmal CanCon requirements. The U.S. wasn’t particularly happy with discoverability but was never going to war over it, said U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. Article content Whatever the U.S.’s previous position, Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc appeared delighted it was now a non-issue. Article content So, the danger to our “language and culture” is not an issue now and wasn’t much of one before. More a storm in a teacup, really. Article content As for trading with other nations, it appears the U.S. — as part of a Canadian desire for Fortress North America — wanted to align tariffs in certain sectors like steel and aluminum. The purpose was to prevent a third country dumping cheap steel/aluminum in one country — say Canada — which would then make its way to the U.S. Article content Article content It’s a position Carney appears to agrees with as long as it’s part of a “comprehensive deal.” Article content It’s the kind of issue that is hammered out between trade negotiators, is detailed on page 143 of the trade agreement, is read by trade lawyers in trade magazines and never actually worries the average Canadian. Article content In light of these revelations, why aren’t we back at the bargaining table? Article content Janice Charette, Canada’s chief U.S. trade negotiator, told the CBC that “pens are down, but the door is open.” Article content It was Carney’s decision to call off the trade talks and presumably he could push for them to restart. That he isn’t making that call speaks to other political motives: is he burnishing his tough guy credentials? Awaiting to see the outcome of the U.S. midterm elections? Gambling on the anger of U.S. states to convince Donald Trump of the error of his ways? Article content Whatever Carney’s motives, he is playing a bold, dangerous and ambitious game."
Meme - Kirk Lubimov @KirkLubimov: "Canadian Hardwood Plywood and Veneer Association: Chinese plywood is being dumped in Canada.
Liberals: it isn't happening, America's tariffs are unfair.
CBSA: Our investigation confirms it is correct.
America: we told you"
Canada Border Services A...: "Update: our early findings confirm that imports of this product are being sold in the Canadian market at unfair prices (dumped) and subsidized. Temporary duties will now apply as investigations continue."
Canada Border Services Agency: "Fair trade matters. The CBSA launches investigations to see whether decorative and non-structural plywood from China is being sold at unfair prices (dumped) in Canada, subsidized, or both:"
Melissa Chen on X - "One of the most toxic fallouts from the Trump years is this reflexive need a lot of people have to automatically side with anyone going up against him. Mark Carney is banking on that and exploiting it hard. He knows the press will paint Trump as the irresponsible, blustery provocateur in the collapsing Canada-US trade talks, so by going all-out against Trump he scores easy political points. The truth of the matter is that the playing field has been uneven and unfair between Canada and the US for decades. Canada imposes lofty tariffs - sometimes nearly 300% - on American cheese and milk once a tiny quota is filled, and they even give the Europeans better access than they give the Americans. Provinces yanked American wine and spirits off the shelves in government liquor stores. They hit US cars with extra tariffs and quotas. Softwood lumber has been a long-running game too. But the biggest problem is the Chinese back-door scam: steel, auto parts, and EVs from China get lightly processed or just relabeled in Canada, then shipped into America under USMCA rules so they dodge the tariffs Trump put on Beijing. That lets China keep flooding the North American market, undercutting American (and Canadian) workers, and basically laundering its way around the sanctions and trade barriers meant to stop its cheating. The Trump admin wants to end the free ride and make Canada shut down the transshipment loophole that China is exploiting. Carney walking away from a near-done deal and playing the victim just keeps Canada in bed with Beijing while American (and Canadian) workers pay the price. And he’s hoping you don’t look beyond the headlines and find out the truth"
Cecile Shaw on X - "One reason the Canada-US trade deal collapsed: Canada could not promise / would not stop Chinese steel being transshipped into auto parts & then into the U.S. market. The U.S. requires a strict “melt and pour” rule. Steel must be melted and poured in North America to qualify for preferential treatment. This stops Chinese steel from entering Canada, getting light processing, and crossing the border as “North American” content to evade tariffs. Recall The Canadian Steel Producers Association and Aluminium Association of Canada have both publicly confirmed Chinese dumping is happening, warning Canada risks becoming a dumping ground for China’s excess steel and aluminum. A recent White House report on the “transshipment scam” also listed Canada as a problem country in China’s shadow network for evading U.S. tariffs. Canada failed to deliver enforceable guarantees. Mexico accepted the melt-and-pour requirements, raised tariffs on Chinese steel and auto parts, and closed the back door. Canada left it open and the deal fell apart."
Sammy on X - "Evidently, Canada thinks that "free trade" should only be free for Canada. Crooks! Ripping off Americans/American business like this deserves for Canada to be crushed with far more than 50% tariffs. Canadian government is lying about the REAL bad guy is. Canadian tariffs for years have also included:
45% tariffs on American HVACs
245% on American cheese
298% on American butter
69% on American sausage
238% on American chicken
57.8% on American Barley seed
26.5% on American meat
35% on American vaccumns
35% on American cable boxes
45% on American TVs
25% on American steel
45% on American aluminum
48% on American copper
Evidently, Canada thinks that "free trade" should only be free for Canada. Crooks!"
Cecile Shaw on X - "Canada doesn’t even practice free trade within its own borders. It maintains interprovincial tariffs and regulations on a wide range of products and services. Even maple syrup cannot move freely across the country. Major industries including banking, liquor, telecommunications, dairy, and lumber are largely controlled by massive oligopoly cartels. So when you hear Carney or any Cdn politician lecture the United States about “free trade,” it is one of the most hypocritical statements imaginable."
Sammy on X - "And ... they smear & blame Trump/US to hide their own shady deeds."
cbcwatcher on X - "The Globe’s editorial board has discovered Canadian sovereignty is non-negotiable—conveniently, when the pressure comes from Washington demanding Canada limit other trade deals. Where was this spine in January when Mark Carney flew to Beijing, inked MoUs on energy, food safety, wood products, culture, and RCMP–Chinese Ministry of Public Security crime-fighting cooperation, and declared a “new strategic partnership”? Those weren’t just canola tariff relief and a capped EV quota. They expanded institutional ties with a party-state that interferes in Canadian democracy, targets diaspora communities, and treats economic leverage as political coercion. Crucially, key parts remain secret. The precise terms of the RCMP–MPS arrangement (and fuller details of several other MoUs) have never been publicly released. Canadians are expected to trust non-binding summaries and joint statements while the operational fine print on intelligence/evidence sharing with China’s security apparatus stays undisclosed. Sovereignty apparently only becomes sacred when American negotiators try to constrain Canada’s options. Deeper process architecture, security dialogue, and opaque “mutual support” language with Beijing? That’s diversification and resilience. The selective alarm is the tell: principle when it fits the preferred narrative, flexibility (and secrecy) when the counterparty is the CCP. If sovereignty is never negotiable, apply the standard evenly—or stop pretending the concern is pure @PatrickBrethour @globeandmail"
Meme - Gina Unititered: "Hey @grok, is there any realistic scenario where Canada could actually win a trade war with the United States? Short answer. No sugarcoating."
Grok @grok: "No. Canada's economy is roughly 1/12 the size of the US. About 70-75% of Canadian goods exports go south, equal to ~16-20% of Canadian GDP. US exposure is a fraction of that. Tariffs inflict far larger relative GDP and job losses on Canada. Energy leverage exists but cutting it would crater Canadian revenues first. Diversification is too slow to change the math."
The same people who mock Trump for imposing tariffs, saying they are always bad for the country imposing them, want to impose tariffs on the US
The Real Mr Bench on X - "Mark Carney says Canada was “attacked.” “You’re at war when you get attacked.” Then listen to what comes next. Carney says Ottawa is looking at the tax system and how to “shift the burden to those who are most able to pay.” Trade talks collapse. Declare Canada under attack. Start talking about who should surrender more of their money. Is Carney selling socialism to Canadians under the cover of a trade war?"
Yuan Yi Zhu on X - "This is a great letter. There is no reason why Mr Carney can't release the draft agreement that he walked away from. The Americans know what is in it, the Canadian government knows what is in it, and the Canadian people deserve to know as well."
Christo Aivalis | Facebook - "Carney needs to realize we aren't gonna capitalism our way out of this. The economic effects will be devastating as we prepare to fight Trump. Only World War 2 style economic planning and taxation upon the rich will see us win this fight. Socialism or MAGAism"
Left wing logic - you need to destroy the economy and the country to spite Trump. If you don't you're a traitor
James E. Thorne on X - "Canada’s Trade-War Denial
Canada does not need “time to adjust.” It needs a political class willing to stop confusing indignation with economic policy. And it needs access to the US market. President Trump is focused on economic sovereignty, this is not personal this is business. I assumed Mark Carney understood that. He has spent enough time around markets and capital to know that a country cannot posture its way out of a competitiveness crisis. Yet Ottawa’s turn toward symbolism and performative retaliation suggests that faith was misplaced. Canada does not need another era of Pierre Elliott Trudeau-style progressive theatre: moral signalling, state direction, and lofty ambition detached from the hard work of building productive capacity. It needs an adult willing to confront vested interests, make trade-offs, and put economic strength ahead of political performance. The last adult, it seems, has just left the room. The elbows-up strategy is embarrassing and hurts Canada long term, like a teenager emotional response to the reality of the world. Carney’s use of it helps neither negotiation nor leverage, and it wounds Canada more than the U.S. The central strategic objective is obvious: preserve access to the United States, the world’s largest and most dynamic market, Canada’s neighbour, and the foundation of its export economy. That access is not a talking point. It supports Canadian jobs, investment, supply chains, and growth. Canada focus on China is an own goal. China cannot replace it. China is distant, strategically uncertain, and separated from Canada by geography, institutions, and infrastructure. It cannot reproduce continental integration: shared energy systems, cross-border capital, integrated factories, common standards, and decades of commercial interdependence. Canada does not get to trade on sentiment while depending on geography. Nor can it “win” a trade war with its largest customer. Ottawa can impose targeted costs where it has genuine leverage. It can negotiate firmly. But broad retaliation is not a strategy. It is emotional performance masquerading as economic policy. Too many in the political and economic elite appear to believe retaliation can force the structural adjustment Canada has avoided for years. It cannot. Tariffs do not raise productivity. They do not attract investment, reduce regulatory costs, or make Canadian businesses more competitive. They raise prices for households, increase costs for manufacturers, and encourage mobile capital to locate elsewhere. Retaliation for its own sake is an expensive expression of national frustration. Canadians pay the bill. The deeper problem is not merely American pressure. It is Canadian failure: weak business investment, poor productivity growth, regulatory paralysis, provincial trade barriers, slow approvals, inadequate infrastructure, and a subsidy culture that protects incumbents rather than rewards builders. Canada is rich in assets and poor in execution. It has energy, minerals, capital, skilled people, and privileged proximity to America. Yet it has made investment too slow, too risky, and too expensive. The answer is not submission. It is reform: deregulate, accelerate approvals, remove barriers to capital and internal trade, and lower the cost of building. Canada may need time to adjust. But first it needs to end its denial."
Hans Mahncke on X - "99% of U.S. natural gas imports, 85% of electricity imports, and 60% of crude oil imports sounds impressive, but it is totally misleading. Those are percentages of imports, not of total U.S. energy supply. America produces most of its own energy, so the Canadian share of actual U.S. supply is dramatically smaller. In electricity, for example, it is about 1%."
Meme - IQ 589 I Cody Penn-Dent I Effluencer @codypd: "Picture of how Canada gets oil from Alberta to Ontario and Quebec. Canadians are talking about "cutting off" the US from Canadian petroleum and natural gas. What they will end up doing is cutting Canada off from Alberta's petroleum and natural gas"
aaahhhchew @aaahhhchew: "Canadians will starve, suffer and live in complete poverty just so they can say "It's Trumps fault". Once Canada is destroyed all these TDS lib commies are all just going to move back to the Euro. Canada has been hijacked as a tool to be used as a thorn in President Trumps shoe"
Meanwhile left wingers are still opposing new pipelines
Peter McCaffrey on X - "SHOCKING: The NY Times reveals that the US were keen to move ahead with the Keystone XL pipeline, but the Liberals used it as a bargaining chip to try to change the deal in the last hours. Side note: Why can’t we get this kind of information from our own government and media?"
TIme to blame Trump again
Dan Knight on X - "Donald Trump has just damned Canada to four more years of David Eby and Mark Carney. Elections are coming, and these grifters will seize the opportunity to wrap themselves in the flag and cash in on the anti-Trump wave."
Christian Heiens ๐ on X - "The average Canadian has never looked at a map of their own country. Line 9, which supplies nearly all of Ontario and Quebec with their oil, runs through the United States before re-entering Canada through Southern Ontario. Years ago, the Canadians had an opportunity to build a new pipeline named Energy East that would have supplied Eastern Canada and the Maritimes with Albertan oil without entering the US. The Liberals killed the project. Shutting off Canadian energy to America means shutting off energy to Ontario and Quebec too. So congratulations on destroying your own country and ruining whatever leverage you had. I'm sure it made you all feel morally superior at the time though, so maybe it was worth it."
Canadian patriotism is about destroying the company to spite the US and Donald Trump
Jason Pugh ๐จ๐ฆ ๐ณ️๐ on X - "WATCH: Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe asked what it would take to put oil and potash on the table in the Canada-U.S. trade war. “It’s not possible.” He says it would be a flawed policy that would put Canadians out of work. @PremierScottMoe @MarkJCarney @realDonaldTrump"
Scott Robertson on X - "Scott Moe rules out applying export tariffs on potash as leverage against the U.S."
Jiggly News on X - "It would be nice if Moe and Smith were on Team Canada"
Randy Walsh on X - "If Moe and Smith follow through on what you want them to do, it would mean throwing 10s of thousands of Canadians out of work. I’m not sure why you have a problem with their decision to protect people’s incomes."
Left wing Canadians will destroy the country just to spite Trump
Meme - "Ok so let me get this straight... Canadians are losing their minds because ol Donny boy just doubled down on the East tariffs on Steel and aluminum which will most definitely limit access of their goods going south, losing them billions....imagine that, how thing horrific. Meanwhile the East has been limiting access for Alberta oil with refusal of pipelines for fking Decades!!! Won't buy Alberta oil, would rather get it tankerred in from Foreign countries... So Alberta is Forced to sell it south at a discount and then Alberta is still forced to send the East money...So wheres been the Canadian outrage?? Honestly this country Is so ridiculous, you cant even make this shit up, it's no wonder Albertans want to Exit Canada."
cbcwatcher on X - "For the first time, Canadians hear the US side of the collapsed trade talks. In a CBC interview with Rosemary Barton, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said America felt “very, very confident in the deal we had struck late Tuesday night.” They believed they had offered “the best deal available to any country on the planet with respect to Canada.”Then Ottawa returned with more demands. “They had some additional requests… that were too much for the United States,” Greer said. “Giving them the best deal in the world would have been enough.”He rejected claims of last-minute U.S. additions: the president’s comment was “off the cuff.” The core rates (autos toward 15%, steel and aluminum cuts) were agreed Tuesday and did not change. On the president’s comment that last-minute U.S. additions “sound like me,” Greer pushed back: the remarks were “off the cuff.” The last conversation between Trump and Prime Minister Carney was Tuesday night, with “some meeting of the minds” on specific rates and percentages. “Hard to change those things after a given time.”On specific Canadian flashpoints:* Medium- and heavy-duty trucks fell under a separate national-security measure, not the auto deal.* “Fortress North America” coordination was about preventing Canada from becoming a backdoor for third-country steel and aluminum—not dictating Ottawa’s future deals.* French-language discoverability was “the farthest thing from a red line”Greer repeated that Canada has been the only country (besides a settled China dispute) to retaliate with bans and caps. Channels are currently closed. “We have a trade policy. It’s global in nature. We’re proceeding with it.”That’s the American account of why the talks fell apart @jamiesongreer @RosieBarton"
Meme - Pierre Pollievre: "Why is the Liberal media so madly in love with Mark Carney? Because, when Trudeau/ Freeland debtonate the economy, they can say, "here is a NEW Liberal saviour to rescue us from the crisis created by the previous Liberal saviours." #Debtonation" - 2021-03-20
Bradshaw on X - "Elbows Up ๐คท♀️ Carney again chooses Europe over Canada to Vacation. His assets are The US and every chance he gets he’s off to Europe,again why how did anyone fall for this goof.."
wealthmoose on X - "๐จ WHAT ARE THE ODDS? ๐จ๐ฆ๐ฎ๐น In just months:
๐ฎ๐น Brookfield completes a ~$900M acquisition of Italy’s Fosber.
๐ก Brookfield is reported exploring a takeover of Italian telecom giant INWIT.
⚽ Brookfield completes its takeover of Oaktree — whose funds control Inter Milan, tied to the massive San Siro redevelopment.
Meanwhile… ๐จ๐ฆ Mark Carney — Brookfield’s former Chair — is rapidly deepening Canada’s relationship with Italy across energy, critical minerals, defence, investment and supply chains. Proof of wrongdoing? No. One hell of a coincidence? Absolutely. When public policy and the expanding interests of a PM’s former company keep landing on the same map… Canadians should be asking questions. ๐"
L. Wayne Mathison on X - "Canada has just committed roughly $2.3 billion to Telesat for Arctic military communications. That comes on top of a $2.14 billion federal loan already supporting its Lightspeed satellite project. This is a company whose creditors are now suing over disputed asset transfers and looming debt maturities. Telesat denies the allegations, but taxpayers deserve far more scrutiny than they’re getting. The CEO is also described in parliamentary testimony as a close personal friend of Mark Carney. Friendship does not prove corruption. But when billions of public dollars are involved, that relationship demands full disclosure, transparent procurement and a clear explanation of why this was the best deal available. SpaceX already operates a large, functioning low-Earth-orbit network. Telesat’s full global service is not expected until late 2027. Yet Ottawa keeps acting as though spending enough money can somehow buy Canada an instant place at the front of the technological race. There may be legitimate military reasons for Canada to want sovereign communications rather than depending entirely on an American company. OK. Make that case openly. Show the competing bids, the security requirements, the delivery schedule and the cost comparison. What Ottawa should not do is use “Canadian innovation” as a magic phrase that ends all questioning. We are trying to catch a company that is already far ahead by placing another enormous government bet on an unfinished system tied to a financially troubled parent company. That is industrial policy by political confidence rather than proven performance. Canada is not falling behind because taxpayers refuse to spend enough. We are falling behind because government repeatedly rewards connections, announcements and promises while other countries build, launch and deliver."
Nick Leaf on X - "You can’t make this stuff up. Doug Ford cancels $100 million deal with Starlink and pays huge penalty. Mark Carney, gives $2.3 Billion to his buddy at Telesat to provide internet for Northern Canada. Telesat hires Space X to launch Telesat satellites to cover Northern Canada."
Carney’s climate policy is splitting the Left. Here’s what it means for the Liberals, Conservatives, and the NDP - " Steven Guilbeault, longtime high-profile Greenpeace activist turned Liberal MP, former environment and climate change minister, and driving force behind the Trudeau government’s divisive green policies, is resigning over Carney’s climate policies. This follows news from last week that 14 Liberal MPs had sent a letter to the prime minister at the end of April, objecting to the Ottawa-Alberta energy agreement and raising concerns that the Liberals were backsliding on the environment. Can climate be the seam that tears the Liberals’ ever-broadening tent?... Though cost-of-living pressures have weighed on its salience, Canadians still broadly support climate action. At the height of Trudeau’s unpopularity in 2024, 62 percent of Canadians reported feeling concerned about climate change, including half of Conservative voters. One in four Canadians thought the Carney-Smith MOU was a “betrayal,” including 22 percent of Liberal voters. Last week, La Presse accused Carney of “environmental treason.” The Conservative Party stands to be the main beneficiary of this fracture."
Meme - Shuv Majumdar: "Mark Carney made a bad deal, then lied to Canadians about it. Now Liberal MPs are shutting down scrutiny rather than voting for transparency."
"Liberals adjourn committee without voting on Conservative motion to look into Gordie Howe bridge deal"
Marc Nixon on X - "I just spoke to a socialist boomer who was thrilled that Mark Carney won the last election. I asked one question: “If Canada is such a great investment, why is roughly 91% of Carney’s reported net worth tied to U.S. assets, while only about 0.5% is in Canada? Shouldn’t someone who truly believes Canada be investing here? He was stunned. Most Canadians have no idea Mark Carney is ALL in on ๐บ๐ธ"
Meme - "WORST TEMPORARY FOREIGN WORKER EVER"
Mark Carney might be used to being the smartest guy in the room. That’s no guarantee of success in politics - The Globe and Mail - "If you are always the smartest guy in any discussion, if you can always run rings around the people you’re dealing with, it can impair your judgment – a very different thing from intelligence. Smart people win arguments. Wise people learn from them. Getting your intellectual ass handed to you from time to time induces a needed humility, an understanding that there may be points of view you haven’t encountered, facts you aren’t aware of, angles you haven’t considered. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that intelligence is necessarily an obstacle to judgment, but it can be. Judgment is as much or more a matter of temperament, and experience, as it is processing speed. Jean Chrรฉtien was, like Mr. Trudeau but not Mr. Harper, no intellectual, but he had more political judgment than the two of them put together. Worse, being top dog can also blind you to what the other dogs are thinking. People who think the boss is contemptuous of them will one day return the favour. Mr. Carney is riding high at the moment. The public is rightly frightened by the course of world events, notably the sudden “heel turn” of the United States under Donald Trump. Mr. Carney’s technocratic sheen, the bespoke suits and cool, appraising demeanour, suits their current tastes in leaders. But that is in part because he has not had to do a great deal other than look the part, unflappable and steely eyed. At some point James Bond has to actually kill someone. At some point Mr. Carney is going to have to make some fundamental decisions, win a big fight, deliver on his lofty promises. At that point the wry wink and the easy grin won’t be enough. He’s going to need allies. And at that point the people he’s been bossing about and dressing down are going to make a calculation: Are my interests still served by sticking with this guy? It won’t be love or loyalty that moves them. It will be percentage points... Everything about Mr. Carney screams “I am a Goldman Sachs alum.” And yet his every word or deed seems to say, “I know. Isn’t it great?” That is not a quality that is likely to endear you to people over time. Maybe in business it does, or in senior bureaucratic roles, though I doubt it does even there. But in politics it is lethal. Or at least, it can be. Again, what people want varies with the circumstances... Certainly he has proved himself to be a much more adept political animal than many people might have supposed when he started, in the sense of a willingness to drop long-held principles on the spot if that was what was necessary to win and keep power... he is having to learn all this on the job – a job with frankly dizzying powers. Prime ministers in any Westminster system are immensely powerful. Prime ministers in Canada have always been especially powerful. But the powers of a Canadian prime minister have of late grown to levels that have neither precedent nor parallel... A 2007 survey of 250 experts in 22 countries, scoring prime ministers around the world over last two decades of the 20th century on a number of variables, found widespread agreement that the Prime Minister of Canada was the most powerful of the bunch, and by a wide margin. So in Mr. Carney we have an unusual combination of attributes: extraordinary self-confidence, utter lack of political experience, and enormous power. Is it entirely surprising to find that his conduct in office reveals a certain, shall we say, authoritarian streak? It isn’t just the willingness to ride roughshod over important civil liberties, from the rights of asylum claimants to an independent hearing to the rights of internet users not to have the police snooping into their data to the manifest privacy violations implied by Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act, and Bill C-34, the Safe Social Media Act. It’s also the high-handed treatment of Parliament involved in passing these bills, whether by means of omnibus legislation combining bills with comically disparate purposes, which MPs are obliged to pass at one go; or by arbitrary limits on how long each bill might be debated, or what sorts of amendments might be entertained. It’s Mr. Carney’s refusal to attend more than a handful of Question Periods, even when he is in Ottawa, as if the raucous, rancorous daily hazing of government ministers were beneath him, and not an integral part of his job: the basic requirement of accountability, without which power has no legitimacy. And it’s the lordly way in which he treats his own caucus, not only forcing them to stand and support, over and over again, the very opposite policies to those they stood for little more than a year ago... no prime minister has displayed quite such an obvious personal taste for autocracy, so early in his tenure, with so little evident concern for how this might come back to haunt him. What’s that old show biz saying? Take care how you treat people on the way up. You’ll meet them on the way down."
The "qualifications" crowd have great copes to explain away his lack of political experience
Thread by @TrendPolCa on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "PM @MarkJCarney just handed day-to-day control of his office to an American political operative who worked for Hillary Clinton and Michael Bloomberg. Her title didn't exist until this week, and even the Globe and Mail can't fully explain how she got here. ๐งต๐
Her name is Maia Johnson. She surfaced in Canadian politics last year, coming in from New York City to volunteer on Carney's leadership campaign. By this year she was inside the PMO as his senior adviser on Canada-U.S. relations. Now Carney has made her chief operating officer, a corporate title never before used in the Prime Minister's Office. The chief of staff runs the political agenda. Johnson runs the machine itself, making sure the day-to-day work of the government happens as desired. The Globe pieced together what it could about her. She is cited in news stories as running political strategy and logistics for Democrats, including Clinton, and is connected to Bloomberg's now-defunct strategy firm, Hawkfish. Bloomberg co-chaired Carney's UN climate finance alliance, which sources say is where the two connected. In June, the ethics commissioner fined her for filing her required public disclosures late. Her disclosure statement is still listed as in progress. The Globe asked Johnson directly how she came to work in Canadian politics. She did not reply, and the PMO declined to comment. Her promotion comes as Carney enters year two, under pressure to land a U.S. trade deal and steady a shaky economy.
The person now keeping his government running is one whose path to the job nobody in Ottawa can fully explain — The Globe and Mail"
Tamara Lich ๐จ๐ฆ on X - "Canada already has a Chief Operating Officer. He’s called the Prime Minister. The role of Prime Minister entails day-to-day duties associated with overseeing operations necessary to run a country. Our Prime Minister is too important to waste his time on governing so he’s it off to an American Democrat. Canada, eh? Elbows up!"
Jamil Jivani on X - "Wait, the media wants me to apologize for being friends with VP Vance and going to the White House to establish better dialogue between our countries. Hundreds of thousands of jobs depend on the Canada-US relationship. But Carney chooses to fill his office with Democrat operatives, and that's no big deal? Does he actually want a good relationship with our biggest trading partner? Does he care about Canadian jobs?"
Meme *Liberal Carney stomping on Canada*
*Food* *Immigration* *Housing Price*
*Trump throws tariff slap at Carney*
Bloodied Carney to Canada: "He's bullying us!"
Ryan Gerritsen on X - "Carney is using a tactic called the illusory truth effect on Canadians. He repeats the same statements over and over again in order to make them feel believable and familiar. Facts eventually mean nothing to the people who keep seeing, hearing or reading them because of this repeated familiarity. Here I highlight the endless usage of “deepening”. Carney uses it almost weekly."
In his seminal essay After Ten Years, written at the turn of 1942-1943, the German theologian and anti-Nazi resister Dietrich Bonhoeffer diagnosed a profound psychological pathology that regularly overtakes captured elites. He noted that in the face of systemic institutional pressures, individuals do not merely lose their judgment; they surrender their intellectual independence to a collective condition. In such states, Bonhoeffer warned: “The stupid person… is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack.” Reason falls on deaf ears, and facts that contradict the prevailing group-think are simply pushed aside as inconsequential.
The modern Western establishment is currently held captive by just such a powerful institutional spell: a persistent conviction that the complex frictions of a morally and ethically splintering society can be permanently smoothed over through the mechanics of public relations, bureaucratic deference and administrative compliance. When faced with deep civilisational or theological contradictions, the modern reflex of our elite is rarely to engage in critical thinking. Instead, it is to retreat into a defensive, self-righteous insulation.
Leaders entrench themselves behind boilerplate statements and tactical retractions, hoping to survive the immediate news cycle by staying on the rehearsed message and then fleeing back to the safety of the elite bubble.
Rarely is this institutional pattern more vividly illustrated than in a single, striking photograph from Lambeth Palace that was recently released. The image caught Archbishop Sarah Mullally presenting a Lambeth Award to Hafiz Muhammad Tahir Mehmood Ashrafi, the chairman of the Pakistan Ulema Council. Standing just three feet away was Ashrafi’s wife, wrapped tightly from head to wrist, with only her eyes visible to the assembled crowd.
The subsequent public backlash followed a predictable contemporary script. When it emerged that Ashrafi had a documented history of praising militant figures, Lambeth Palace scrambled to rescind the honour, issuing a defensive statement citing the cleric’s “past comments”. Yet, in characteristic fashion, the Church establishment said absolutely nothing about the underlying theological implications or the profound asymmetry of the ceremony itself. They treated a civilisational capitulation as a mere administrative oversight. In keeping with the prevailing institutional group-think, the Archbishop has avoided placing herself in front of television cameras or taking live, unscripted questions from journalists. It is the familiar playbook: Go woke, get caught, fake regret, lie low.
It is easy to condemn Dame Sarah for this display of moral incoherence, to treat her as an isolated offender and demand her immediate resignation. I confess that was my first, impulsive reaction. But such a demand misses a fundamental truth: Dame Sarah is, above all, a product of her time. The prevailing norm across Britain’s leadership class, indeed across the elite institutions of the wider West, is one of institutional appeasement, historical atonement and systematic abasement.
For decades, Western elites have insisted on a rapid transition toward absolute multiculturalism, operating on the unexamined hope that diversity would somehow, against all historical odds, work out so long as they kept insisting it would. A core tenet of the modern establishment is that all cultural frameworks are equally good or equally bad. Dame Sarah, as the most senior cleric of the established Church of England, should know better.
What do the sacred texts and classical commentaries of Islam actually say about why a woman is veiled, and what obligations are placed upon the man? The classical Sunni tradition, constructed through the authoritative Koranic commentaries (tafsir) of Al-Tabari and Ibn Kathir, alongside the philosophical treatises of Al-Ghazali and Ibn Taymiyya, establishes a synchronised social architecture built around four clear rationales for the mandatory veiling of women:
Crucially, this system imposes a parallel set of commandments that men must follow. They must lower their gaze and continuously police their external environments to avoid visual temptation. When this synchronised system of norms is translated into live practice, it inevitably produces an externalised model of social management. By making the woman’s physical covering and spatial isolation the primary guarantor of social order, the responsibility for male purity is offloaded on to the female body. Men are treated as predatory, reactive actors stripped of internal moral agency, driven entirely by external visual triggers. Women, conversely, are reduced to guarded commodities whose basic human freedom of movement and public visibility must be permanently sacrificed to maintain social stability. “Free” they most certainly are not.
Dame Sarah should also be aware of the concrete consequences of these norms for women in the countries where Shariah is the law of the land. Where this externalised policing system runs as the dominant legal framework, it divides women into three distinct categories:
According to a landmark UN Women’s survey, 99.3 per cent of Egyptian women reported having been sexually harassed, demonstrating that external concealment does not guarantee public safety, but instead treats female visibility as a provocation that legitimises abuse. Across major metropolitan transit networks, such as the metros of Dubai, Riyadh, Cairo, and Tehran, authorities run dedicated women-and-children carriages. Public space is literally partitioned, structurally redesigned around the inability of the system to guarantee public safety through internal self-restraint.
Finally, the Archbishop of Canterbury must by now be aware of the impact on women in Britain and the rest of the West of the influx into our societies of millions of men raised to view women in these ways.
In the United Kingdom, the independent Jay Report found that at least 1,400 children had been sexually abused in Rotherham alone, noting that authorities were slow to intervene from an institutional fear of stoking community tensions. Rape-gang perpetrators were disproportionately of Pakistani and South Asian background – “overwhelmingly so” according to Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary.
More recently, Baroness Casey’s national audit of group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse presented clear evidence of over-representation among suspects of Asian and Pakistani-heritage men in the data compiled by multiple British police forces. Data from the Government’s Forced Marriage Unit recorded hundreds of cases where honour-based coercion was used to enforce parallel cultural frameworks within isolated communities.
What is to be done? In continental Europe, nations including France, Belgium, Austria, Denmark and the Netherlands have all enacted legislation forbidding the concealment of the face in public. Yet such measures treat the veil merely as a functional security loophole rather than a deep manifestation of an asymmetric social theology. By reducing a profound civilisational difference to a routine policing measure, secular states miss the opportunity to defend the positive, foundational virtues of an open society – namely, the internal moral governance of the individual and the mutual public accountability between men and women.
This is precisely where religious leaders are called to step forward. Instead of pressing on with the one-way accommodation of militant Islam, Dame Sarah could use her platform to defend the core moral genius of the theological tradition of which she is supposed to be the custodian.
In the Christian framework, the ethical responsibility for sexual purity and social order is placed squarely on the individual conscience. Moral rectitude is defined as an internal victory of self-control, exercised within a society of shared public freedom. Christianity presumes that, though sinful, men are morally accountable beings fully capable of respecting the bodily autonomy of women, regardless of how those women are dressed or where they walk. This approach builds a culture of reciprocal respect: men are commanded to honour women as fellow image-bearers of God, and women are empowered to occupy public spaces uncovered, without their human dignity being diminished. The Christian model is in this and many other respects quite different from a system of spatial partitioning and external enforcement.
As Bonhoeffer pointed out later in After Ten Years, structural stupidity is not a permanent congenital defect, but a particular psychological impact of historical circumstances. Because it is an induced state of group-think rather than an absence of intellect, it can be broken. But “only an act of liberation, not instruction, can overcome it”, Bonhoeffer wrote.
True liberation of our institutions begins the moment a leader finds the moral courage to step outside the consensus, replace passive appeasement with courageous defence and confidently assert the ethical superiority of the Christian inheritance.