Carney gave an important speech yesterday, which you can read here. That lead to a lot of people praising him for his honesty in noting that the rules-based order was accepted by developed nations because they benefited from it, even though everyone knew it was bullshit: if you weren’t in the club, the rules didn’t apply to you. And even if you were in the club, the rules didn’t always apply to you, but most of them did and overall the benefits outweighed the costs, at least as far as our ruling class was concerned.
Carney points out that this deal has been violated in a rupture. The old world order is dead. People who say that it died in Gaza are WRONG. Mass murder of brown people in a non-developed country is acceptable to the rules based order. (It would not be acceptable in South Korea or Japan.)
But there’s something very important in Carney’s speech: he brags about having dropped taxes and that’s a clue.
Carney is clear eyed and honest enough to recognize the hypocrisy of the old system. He was a participant, but he was one of the rare powerful participants who was able to function and realize some of the injustices of the old system. He knew it was bullshit. Most people need to entirely believe in a system, they can’t handle the moral dissonance. To Carney the trade off was worth if it you were part of the Global North, and he was willing to live with that and participate in it.
Now long before Carney was Prime Minister I had criticized him. As a central banker he blew two housing bubbles, one in Canada and one in Britain, which massively hurt ordinary people and he bailed out bankers and rich people during the financial collapse. In fact, his performance in Canada was abysmal, in that it set up a new housing bubble basically immediately.
But housing bubbles are good for rich people. They get the benefits, not the costs.
And that’s the key to understanding Carney. He’s not a left winger. He’s not a post war liberal. He’s a neoliberal technocrat, and the job of neoliberal technocrats is to keep making the rich richer. It really is almost that simple and if you use that as your guide to their actions you’ll be right most of the time.
Let’s go back to those taxes. One of Carney’s goals is to reindustrialize Canada. It’s a real goal, he’s taking action on it, spending money on it and cutting deals pursuing it. But low corporate taxes and low marginal top individual tax rates undercuts that goal. The higher corporate taxes are the more it makes sense to reinvest earnings in production. If top individual rates are low, the rich want money cashed out thru stock buybacks (which should be illegal if you want industrial growth, because they too encourage wasting money that could be reinvested in production) or dividends.
You should also have high capital gains taxes on short term gains. Ninety percent if cashed out under five years, dropping 10% a year after that is a good benchmark, with exceptions for primary residences and a few other niche cases. Again, you want people investing for the long term, and this also cuts out a lot of the bullshit that happens due to stock options.
So if Carney’s only goal was re-industrializtion, and he was method-agnostic, not an ideologue, he would raise certain taxes rather than lowering them.
But he didn’t do that, because Carney, like most politicians and senior technocrats in our system, is a concierge for the rich. His job is to make them better off. They don’t want to be annexed by the US or to have to live in fear of a fickle US changing deals at a whim. But they still want to be super rich. In the old world order that meant having access to the US, because US returns were outsized compared to non-US returns. Every elite in every other country wanted access to US financial markets. But that access is not worth the price any more.
What makes Carney different from most current elite concierges is that he is actually competent, not a worthless courtier, and that he’s able to see the hypocrisies of the system. He’s self-aware.
I supported Carney in the last election and I still support him because while he’s far from what I want, he’s at least doing some of the right things. Enough of the right things to be worth supporting. That doesn’t mean I like him, or even think he’s a good person. He isn’t. But he’s competent and has enough guts to move away from the US. While he does so he’s making a lot of compromises like joining the Board of Peace. That’s an evil act and I’m sure he knows it is, being clear eyed, but it’s a minor evil act because Canada doesn’t have a potential veto on how Palestinians are treated.
I wish he was better and my support is very conditional. Perhaps I’m not as pure as I should be. Feel free to flay me in the comments. But a man who helps break up the American Empire, and that’s what Carney is doing by being the first to make a real break with the US and with his speech calling for the middle powers to abandon America, is doing enough to make it over to the “on the balance, more good than evil” book in my mind. Now if he had a veto on Gaza the way an American President does, it’d be different.
He doesn’t and he’s helping destroy the old world order while being by far and away the best current option for Canada.
We need better if we’re ever going to move back to a truly good economy in western countries or a more good than evil world order. Carney’s still a concierge for the rich. But in helping protect Canada’s rich, he’s helping destroy the American Empire and that will be good for billions of people, including Palestinians, and he’s protecting Canada from America and some of what he’s doing will be good for ordinary people.
Even if Carney’s motives for helping destroy the old order are crass, the fact that he’s doing so is enough for me.
This site is only viable due to reader donations. If you value it and can, please subscribe or donate.
Feral Finster
https://indi.ca/wolves-crying-wolf-canada-denmark-etc/
Like & Subscribe
So here we have it. I agree with Dara, principles and values are not absolute givens. You can have them, if you prefer to have them, only when you can afford to have them. It’s as though it’s a law of physics. Carney’s speech means Canada is weak. It’s an admission that Canada can ill-afford to be principled. By that measure, Carney’s own measure mind you, Canada has never afforded to be principled and by that measure Canada will never be principled. America can afford to be principled but has emphatically chosen not to be as all current great powers have chosen not to be. Principles Schminciples.
http://youtube.com/post/UgkxLkzc3UlwJVwQ1enl6sMOMsJ_R372lTbD?si=Bvc1lCAwT7c652or
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-pro-palestinian-protesters-home-foreign-minister-melanie-joly/
Mark Pontin
Ian Welsh: ‘That doesn’t mean I like him, or even think he’s a good person. He isn’t.’
‘Good people’ don’t usually get things done, Ian.
LBJ wasn’t a ‘good person.’ But he’d made his plans since he was a poor teacher of impoverished children in Depression-era Texas, then hid those plans completely from all his fellow Southern pols and gone along for decades with all the corruption, till he was in the White House. But once he was in and was told by his frightened advisors that he’d lose the support of every other Southern pol and many others in his party if he pushed through the Civil Rights Act, he went in the other room to think for some minutes and then came out and said, ‘what’s the Presidency for, gentlemen?’ and started pushing the Act through.
Your boy Jeremy Corbyn *is* a ‘good person’, conversely. In the decades since he became an MP in1983 — 1983, FFS! — he’s been at just about every pro-Palestine, pro-IRA, anti-apartheid, anti-Iraq war, pro-gay, and every other identitarian underdog demonstration he could be at. Here’s his record —
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Corbyn
And he’s achieved eff-all and been totally worthless.
Ian Welsh
While he had a lot of flaws FDR was, on the balance, a good man who has vast compassion for ordinary people (he was also a racist, though he liked the Chinese and had great compassion for their suffering, which is what caused his actions against the Japanese), and he got more good done than any other US President.
Usually is doing a lot of work.
Also you’re confused about what a good person is, LBJ may have been a piece of shit in his personal life, but he was a good person in many ways, as your anecdote proves. He also launched the war on poverty and was so upset by the Vietnam war that he decided not to run again.
Perfect? No. But he was good in many of the ways that matter for leaders.
This confusion between whether someone is a good friend and/or parent and whether they are a good leader matters.
If Carney was a truly good leader he’d be raising taxes to support re-industrialization, as I noted. He can’t stop the Gaza genocide even if he went all in, so be it. But he can raise taxes to speed up re-industrialization, and doing so would protect Canada and help the transition he wants. It would also help ordinary people, something FDR and LBJ wanted to do, but which Carney is largely indifferent to. If it happens, he’s OK with it, but his policies as both a central banker and as Prime Minister indicate it’s not a primary goal.
I guess I need to do another post on what makes someone a good leader and the difference between ethics and morals.
Clonal Antibody
You might also be interested in this
https://rtdefree.online/international/267700-entfuehrung-maduros-chinas-stille-harte-antwort-auf-washington/
This is the only place I found it – use translate to read – if you look for an English version, you won’t find it.
I don’t see any coverage of this in Western media
I was pointed to it by
https://sonar21.com/chinas-silent-tough-response-to-washingtons-kidnapping-of-the-maduros/
Quote:
The first phase of China’s response began at 9:15 a.m. on January 4, when the People’s Bank of China discreetly announced the temporary suspension of all US dollar transactions with companies with ties to the US defense sector. Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and General Dynamics awoke to news that all their transactions with China had been frozen without notice.
.
.
.
.
.
At 11:43 a.m. that same day, the State Grid Corporation of China, which controls the world’s largest power grid, announced the technical review of all its contracts with US suppliers of electrical equipment, implying that China is decoupling itself from American technology.
The US government had not yet fully digested the blow when China activated a new package of measures: mobilizing the Global South. At 4:22 p.m. that same day, January 4, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi offered Brazil, India, South Africa, Iran, Turkey, Indonesia, and 23 other countries immediate preferential terms of trade for any country that publicly pledged not to recognize a Venezuelan government that would come to power through the criminal hands of the United States.
In less than 24 hours, 19 countries had accepted the offer. Brazil was the first, followed by India, South Africa and Mexico. And that is the practical realization of the multipolar world in action. China has achieved an immediate anti-US coalition using the weapon of economic incentives.