I think this is worth posting in full. Once again Carney and Canada are moving faster than any of America’s vassals, which is fascinating because Canada is the most vulnerable to the US of all the vassals. But then, that’s why, plus some luck.
Carney was the UK’s and Canada’s central banker. He did a terrible job, blowing two housing bubbles. I backed him in the last election because he was saying the right things, and the alternative was a Trump style conservative with a room temperature IQ who would spread wide for Trump.
Carney spends much of his time in this speech pointing out that the old order was full of hypocrisy. He should know, he had to say all the mealy mouthed lies, you can’t have the jobs he had otherwise. But he didn’t have to say this now, he didn’t have to point this out, he could have just moved to the fact that there’s a rupture.
His point is that the old world provided a lot of benefits to many nations like Canada and Europe, and even though everyone knew it was in many ways unjust, if the price of admission was hypocrisy, then so be it. But that world is dead, the benefits are gone and we don’t have to pretend it wasn’t in some ways awful. We also shouldn’t pretend that world is coming back or that the benefits of that world some nations received can be regained by appeasing Trump and America.
As for Carney’s plan, it’s simple: the middle powers should ally with each other so they can’t be pushed around. In other words, don’t just switch vassalage over to China. But certainly do cut deals with China.
Every day we are reminded that we live in an era of great power rivalry. That the rules-based order is fading. That the strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must.
This aphorism of Thucydides is presented as inevitable — the natural logic of international relations reasserting itself. And faced with this logic, there is a strong tendency for countries to go along to get along. To accommodate. To avoid trouble. To hope that compliance will buy safety.
It won’t.
So, what are our options?
In 1978, the Czech dissident Václav Havel wrote an essay called The Power of the Powerless. In it, he asked a simple question: how did the communist system sustain itself?
His answer began with a greengrocer. Every morning, this shopkeeper places a sign in his window: “Workers of the world, unite!” He does not believe it. No one believes it. But he places the sign anyway — to avoid trouble, to signal compliance, to get along. And because every shopkeeper on every street does the same, the system persists.
Not through violence alone, but through the participation of ordinary people in rituals they privately know to be false.
Havel called this “living within a lie.” The system’s power comes not from its truth but from everyone’s willingness to perform as if it were true. And its fragility comes from the same source: when even one person stops performing — when the greengrocer removes his sign — the illusion begins to crack.
It is time for companies and countries to take their signs down. For decades, countries like Canada prospered under what we called the rules-based international order. We joined its institutions, praised its principles, and benefited from its predictability. We could pursue values-based foreign policies under its protection.
We knew the story of the international rules-based order was partially false. That the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient. That trade rules were enforced asymmetrically. And that international law applied with varying rigour depending on the identity of the accused or the victim.
This fiction was useful, and American hegemony, in particular, helped provide public goods: open sea lanes, a stable financial system, collective security, and support for frameworks for resolving disputes.
So, we placed the sign in the window. We participated in the rituals. And largely avoided calling out the gaps between rhetoric and reality. This bargain no longer works. Let me be direct: we are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition. Over the past two decades, a series of crises in finance, health, energy, and geopolitics laid bare the risks of extreme global integration.
More recently, great powers began using economic integration as weapons. Tariffs as leverage. Financial infrastructure as coercion. Supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited. You cannot “live within the lie” of mutual benefit through integration when integration becomes the source of your subordination. The multilateral institutions on which middle powers relied— the WTO, the UN, the COP—the architecture of collective problem solving — are greatly diminished.
As a result, many countries are drawing the same conclusions. They must develop greater strategic autonomy: in energy, food, critical minerals, in finance, and supply chains. This impulse is understandable. A country that cannot feed itself, fuel itself, or defend itself has few options. When the rules no longer protect you, you must protect yourself. But let us be clear-eyed about where this leads. A world of fortresses will be poorer, more fragile, and less sustainable.
And there is another truth: if great powers abandon even the pretense of rules and values for the unhindered pursuit of their power and interests, the gains from ‘transactionalism’ become harder to replicate. Hegemons cannot continually monetize their relationships. Allies will diversify to hedge against uncertainty. Buy insurance. Increase options. This rebuilds sovereignty— sovereignty which was once grounded in rules—but which will be increasingly anchored in the ability to withstand pressure.
This classic risk management comes at a price. But that cost of strategic autonomy, of sovereignty, can also be shared. Collective investments in resilience are cheaper than everyone building their own fortress. Shared standards reduce fragmentation. Complementarities are positive sum.
The question for middle powers, like Canada, is not whether to adapt to this new reality. We must. The question is whether we adapt by simply building higher walls — or whether we can do something more ambitious.
Canada was amongst the first to hear the wake-up call, leading us to fundamentally shift our strategic posture. Canadians know that our old, comfortable assumption that our geography and alliance memberships automatically conferred prosperity and security is no longer valid.
Our new approach rests on what Alexander Stubb has termed ‘values-based realism’ — or, to put it another way, we aim to be principled and pragmatic. Principled in our commitment to fundamental values: sovereignty and territorial integrity, the prohibition of the use of force except when consistent with the UN Charter, respect for human rights. Pragmatic in recognizing that progress is often incremental, that interests diverge, that not every partner shares our values.
We are engaging broadly, strategically, with open eyes. We actively take on the world as it is, not wait for the world as we wish it to be. Canada is calibrating our relationships, so their depth reflects our values. We are prioritizing broad engagement to maximize our influence, given the fluidity of the world, the risks that this poses, and the stakes for what comes next. We are no longer relying on just the strength of our values, but also on the value of our strength.
We are building that strength at home. Since my government took office, we have cut taxes on incomes, capital gains and business investment, we have removed all federal barriers to inter-provincial trade, and we are fast-tracking a trillion dollars of investment in energy, AI, critical minerals, new trade corridors, and beyond. We are doubling our defence spending by 2030 and are doing so in ways that builds our domestic industries.
We are rapidly diversifying abroad. We have agreed a comprehensive strategic partnership with the European Union, including joining SAFE, Europe’s defense procurement arrangements. We have signed twelve other trade and security deals on four continents in the last six months. In the past few days, we have concluded new strategic partnerships with China and Qatar. We are negotiating free trade pacts with India, ASEAN, Thailand, Philippines, Mercosur.
To help solve global problems, we are pursuing variable geometry— different coalitions for different issues, based on values and interests. On Ukraine, we are a core member of the Coalition of the Willing and one of the largest per-capita contributors to its defence and security. On Arctic sovereignty, we stand firmly with Greenland and Denmark and fully support their unique right to determine Greenland’s future.
Our commitment to Article 5 is unwavering. We are working with our NATO allies (including the Nordic Baltic 8) to further secure the alliance’s northern and western flanks, including through unprecedented investments in over-the-horizon radar, submarines, aircraft, and boots on the ground.
On plurilateral trade, we are championing efforts to build a bridge between the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the European Union, creating a new trading block of 1.5 billion people. On critical minerals, we are forming buyer’s clubs anchored in the G7 so that the world can diversify away from concentrated supply. On AI, we are cooperating with like-minded democracies to ensure we will not ultimately be forced to choose between hegemons and hyperscalers.
This is not naive multilateralism. Nor is it relying on diminished institutions. It is building the coalitions that work, issue by issue, with partners who share enough common ground to act together. In some cases, this will be the vast majority of nations. And it is creating a dense web of connections across trade, investment, culture on which we can draw for future challenges and opportunities. Middle powers must act together because if you are not at the table, you are on the menu. Great powers can afford to go it alone. They have the market size, the military capacity, the leverage to dictate terms. Middle powers do not.
But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what is offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating. This is not sovereignty. It is the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination.
In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice: to compete with each other for favour or to combine to create a third path with impact. We should not allow the rise of hard power to blind us to the fact that the power of legitimacy, integrity, and rules will remain strong — if we choose to wield it together.
Which brings me back to Havel. What would it mean for middle powers to “live in truth”?
It means naming reality. Stop invoking the “rules-based international order” as though it still functions as advertised. Call the system what it is: a period where the most powerful pursue their interests using economic integration as a weapon of coercion.
It means acting consistently. Apply the same standards to allies and rivals. When middle powers criticize economic intimidation from one direction but stay silent when it comes from another, we are keeping the sign in the window.
It means building what we claim to believe in. Rather than waiting for the hegemon to restore an order it is dismantling, create institutions and agreements that function as described. And it means reducing the leverage that enables coercion.
Building a strong domestic economy should always be every government’s priority. Diversification internationally is not just economic prudence; it is the material foundation for honest foreign policy. Countries earn the right to principled stands by reducing their vulnerability to retaliation.
Canada has what the world wants. We are an energy superpower. We hold vast reserves of critical minerals. We have the most educated population in the world. Our pension funds are amongst the world’s largest and most sophisticated investors. We have capital, talent, and a government with the immense fiscal capacity to act decisively. And we have the values to which many others aspire.
Canada is a pluralistic society that works. Our public square is loud, diverse, and free. Canadians remain committed to sustainability. We are a stable, reliable partner—in a world that is anything but—a partner that builds and values relationships for the long term.
Canada has something else: a recognition of what is happening and a determination to act accordingly. We understand that this rupture calls for more than adaptation. It calls for honesty about the world as it is.
We are taking the sign out of the window. The old order is not coming back. We should not mourn it. Nostalgia is not a strategy. But from the fracture, we can build something better, stronger, and more just. This is the task of the middle powers, who have the most to lose from a world of fortresses and the most to gain from a world of genuine cooperation.
The powerful have their power. But we have something too — the capacity to stop pretending, to name reality, to build our strength at home, and to act together. That is Canada’s path. We choose it openly and confidently. And it is a path wide open to any country willing to take it with us.
ventzu
On the other hand, Carney is joining Trump’s Bored Of Peace, and fully on board with genocide. A couple of takes:
https://x.com/dimitrilascaris/status/2013732453010055264
https://x.com/EnglerYves/status/2013734584878313828
If Russia and China accept Trump’s invitation to join, it gives it false credibility and will undermine their own.
KT Chong
Carney lost me at the “Ukraine”, “Coalition of the Willing”, “Article 5” and “NATO” part.
KT Chong
The Ukraine War was actually provoked by the U.S. and US-led NATO.
The provocation did not begin in 2022. It went back to the Maiden Revolution in 2014, which the US manufactured to undermine Russia.
It can go even further back to the broken promises of the U.S. to not to expand NATO eastward.
Yet, Carney’s mindset is still unable to break out of the geopolitical trap that was created by American hegemonic play in the first place.
KT Chong
But it’s fine by me. I am worried that Canada or Europe will “steal” Russia away from China. That is the only way China can be defeated.
China is like… Conan the freakin’ barbarian. As long as his back is protected (like back against the wall,) Conan cannot be defeated — even if he is surrounded on all other sides by endless waves of enemies.
So this is actually working out perfectly for China.
ventzu
KT, the oligarchs in Russia – and I think Putin – are predisposed to having good relations with the US. Putin also has consistently shown a pro-Israel bias. If the US finally gets its act together and woos Russia, then I’m afraid that China will be left standing alone.
Like & Subscribe
Carney is a technocrat for the global Plutocracy. He does not represent the plebeian interests of the peasantry. The EV deal with China is case in point. When China builds that plant in Canada, it will be mostly on China’s terms because Carney and Canada have no leverage or options. Watch American Factory on how that will work out.
https://www.netflix.com/title/81090071
Building the Chinese EVs in Canada will at least double the price and at a doubling of the price, the Canadian peasantry will be unable to own said EVs. The EVs will be for the upper middle class and the wealthy elite Plutocracy so they can greenwash their extravagant lifestyles while the peasantry makes the EVs, only they the Plutocracy and their technocratic minions can afford, for slave wages under onerous, life-sucking Chinese labor conditions.
I have to laugh at all the shitlibs cheering on Carney, the fixer for the Plutocracy, with his latest deal with China. The same shitlibs who decry, rightfully so, Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians are just fine and dandy with China’s genocide of the Uyghurs. Remember the Uyghur genocide. It was front and center not too long ago and now it;s largely forgotten as if it never happened.
None of that is meant to be apologia for America. The point is, there is no good versus bad here or better versus worse. If you’re a peasant, and most commenting here are and if you’re not man oh man you must really be bored, you have no political options whatsoever and this is why I say, electoral politics, or politics in general at least as the political structure and workings are currently configured, will not deliver you/us from this evil.
Jan Wiklund
Considering what morons North Atlantic politicians use to be, I guess Carney comes out at the top of them.
One shouldn’t have too high hopes, but it may signal a crack of some kind… The question is: how can one take advantage of it?
edwin
“the middle powers should ally with each other so they can be pushed around”
I know what you mean, but it bothers me far beyond what it should. – “can’t”.
edwin
What do I expect from Canada? I live here. My feeling that this is perhaps better than what the NDP would say. That makes me sad.
Carney lost me at the “Ukraine”, “Coalition of the Willing”, “Article 5” and “NATO” part
Middle powers will definitely have to have some sort of defence alliance if they are to survive relatively untrampled. Repurposing NATO makes a whole lot of sense.
It also makes a whole lot of sense for middle powers to know their place. This part is super unpleasant. A middle power is not a great power, even banded together. In general, looking at the comments my immediate feeling is “Perfection is the enemy of good”. The left seems to have a huge problem with this.
Shovelling large amounts of money into a black hole is always a really bad idea and Ukraine is a black hole that is also a lost cause. Russia as a weak great power provides some opportunities for middle powers – a bridge between them perhaps. Peace with Russia represents the road not taken, or perhaps it is to early to be that judgmental. As a competitor with Russia our path will be a difficult one. I would like to see collaboration as opposed to conflict. My guess is that neither China nor the US would like that. It may be impossible to make that happen. There are going to be big mistakes and choices to make where all options are evil.
The last good prime minister Canada had was Chrétien. I did not vote for him, and I am not sorry – but he still was competent. 20+ years is a long time for incompetence. Is Carney competent? Maybe. We aren’t going to get perfect in Canada. We are not going to get great. The question is, do we get good? If not then it probably is all over. If so, then there is a chance, especially if other middle powers also get good – and so far that does not appear to be happening. In the mean time, we must do as we must.
dara fox
like & subscribe
i take some of your points, but you’re a bit one-sided.
re chinese EVs in canada, sure the price will double so only the upper middle classes will buy them, but as for the workers building them, that depends on the political dispensation, whether canadian labor laws and wages are written in to the contracts (in fact if they aren’t, would the price really double?).
as for the uyghers, 2 things:
1. yes you can plausibly call it a genocide, but there’s the technical definition (which is real!), and then there’s the common understanding of genocide, which is mass murder. israel in gaza is the latter. china and the uyghers is the former. it’s akin to what canada (and others) did to their native populations in terms of forced assimilation, abduction, erasure of culture etc, but on a much bigger scale. it’s gruesome, but there is a spectrum of gruesome.
2. as for canada wanting to deal with china despite the uyghers, this goes to what carney said: “Countries earn the right to principled stands by reducing their vulnerability to retaliation.” Between the lines to me he’s saying right now we can’t be completely principled in all cases because we haven’t eliminated vulnerability.
i’m not a carney stan and i know he’s a lib. and if the west wasn’t being threatened by washington, he and the others would be fine with the next racist war of choice. but in this instance it appears to me he’s cutting his cloth to meet the most immediate threat.
Mark Level
Yeah, I am with KT Chong, L&S and others here, his speech started excellently with “The strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must”, but I will agree with others that his Idolatry for NATO and “Article 5” is reprehensible and hypocritical. Now, in context, I understand why he’s bootlicking these Western Idols: it is an attempt (a weak and pathetic one that won’t work) to counter Drumpf’s idiotic claims that Russia and China are about to swallow tiny, innocent Greenland so Mafia Don needs to grab it first to “protect” the Natives.
Since they are Asiatic, related to other Aleutian groups across the Northern reaches of Asia, Scandinavia, Alaska etc. were Trump’s USA to become their ruler I expect they’d be designated Untermenschen and thrown into prisons. A few cowardly types could be extracted to help the invaders survive in an area that is extremely inhospitable and that they don’t understand. (I know that there is one “Polar” Division in some branch of the Pentagon so they could supplement and grow this over time.) Also perhaps a few traitorous Danes trapped there could be recruited, they are White people, so OK in Trump-Miller’s eyes.
But there’s only 57,000 of them, so for the most part under the Trumpist Reich they would be slaves or die, as the Spanish did with the Caribs in fewer than 2 generations. I have read the Spanish Conquest records, Bernal Diaz del Castillo’s “Historia Verdadera de la Conquista de Nueva Espanya” on my first trip across Mexico, and I don’t think Great Emperor Trump’s methods would be very different from what was done half a Millennia ago, the results a type of genocide they still haven’t been able to do to the Palestinians would be far easier in this case, scale of the victim is so much tinier.
But back to Carney: I give this a grade of about 61 out of 100, a solid D minus (better than most of his classmates, however!) The thesis starts well, he spills some cruel truths about his class and his complicity and tattles on others who are worse, rhetorically effective to some.
His invocations of Vaclav Havel, e.g., are successful up to a point. But Vaclav Havel, like Nelson Mandela a decade later, once installed in power was a total sellout (okay, maybe Havel kept a bit of Counterculture cachet, not that that mattered) who whored his nation out willingly to the Globalist, Neoliberal Austerity looting model of predatory capitalism, the World Bank and IMF and that whole crew. Shit, even Fidel Castro looks somewhat good compared to the likes of Havel, he was sincere for a few years before he got trapped believing in his own Gran Caudillo mythos and became the typical strongman tyrant (and likely fathered Justin Trudeau, an apple that fell far from the tree.)
Carney might be a small hand pointing with one finger the way forward, but he is far too craven and cowardly to go there himself. Will others follow the pointing finger? Will they see the Star it’s pointing toward and not just the finger? I’m not overly optimistic. But the idea is out there, perhaps when things get desperate and totally fucked enough, real leaders will come forward, not little Gray institutional men like Carney. And they may be capable of inspiring the masses to actually fight back.
KT Chong
ventzu: “the oligarchs in Russia – and I think Putin – are predisposed to having good relations with the US…”
… NOT after the CIA and/or Trump tried to assassinate Putin with drones.
You don’t have to believe it, but that’s what Putin and Russia concluded and believe, which has been widely reported and discussed outside the mainstream media in the U.S.
It was America’s best remaining move under a game theory analysis. A high-risk Hail Mary move to create an opening to (1) get a new Russian leader who might agree to a Ukraine peace deal = the US is trying to cheat its way out of a defeat in Ukraine; and (2) pull Russia away from China = the US is trying to cheat its way out of no-win scenario with China.
The odds of the decapitating Putin were not good, but it was America’s last best chance to get rid of Putin for a regime change.
And the move fits the pattern of America’s escalating decapitation.
But, the U.S. MISSED.
KT Chong
Game theory: Why the U.S. want Putin gone
Putin is:
• Russia’s strategic autonomy
• The anchor of Russia–China alignment
• Personally invested in Ukraine
Removing Putin could:
• Create chaos
• Open a narrow window for renegotiation
• Allow a successor to “reset” without admitting defeat
So: regime decapitation is the classic Hail Mary move when all other options are failing.
It’s textbook, and it fits the pattern of what the U.S. has been doing and escalating, (i.e., decapitation.)
I don’t have insider information. The U.S. obviously denies it. However, we can infer and conjecture what actually happened behind-the-scene with cold logic and reasoning.
Reports indicate that it’s what Putin and Russia believe. IMO, they are right.
KT Chong
ventzu: “Putin also has consistently shown a pro-Israel bias.”
Russia (Putin) and Iran are allies.
spud
hilarious,
“This fiction was useful, and American hegemony, in particular, helped provide public goods: open sea lanes, a stable financial system, collective security, and support for frameworks for resolving disputes.”
then the real truth comes out about the rules based order,
“A country that cannot feed itself, fuel itself, or defend itself has few options.”
and that’s the results of free trade rules based order. i predicted right before nafta, that free trade would collapse the mexican economy, our huge well oiled corporations would devastate mexico’s small farms and business, and it did in a spectacular manor.
then bill clinton spread the love to asia, only to see the same results. he got the same results with russia.
so the rules based order was simply the 1800’s golden era. a era of mass enslavement, poverty, hunger and debt.
some stability.
there were no gains at all for most people and countries. however, from 1993 on wards under the rules based order, the amount of billionaires in the world exploded.
today the west is broken. china never went away from protectionism, which i predicted they would not. and are on the verge of ruling the world, which i predicted would happen under bill clintons rules based order.
let me know how this works out fer ya, it did not in the past leaving canada with exploding poverty and debt,
“We are negotiating free trade pacts with India, ASEAN, Thailand, Philippines, Mercosur.”
canada free traded away its industrial advantage. its now a banana republic, that is offering the world dirt, that is stuff in the ground, or growing above the ground. same in the U.S.A., we are just living on whats left of the new deal/fair deal, etc.
spud
KT Chong;
never underestimate the power of luring others away by flattery and want. putin and his inner circle are desperate to be equals in the davos world.
they should have figured out by 2008, that they were on the table, and will always be on the table.
to even entertain the notion that they would be treated as equals, is laughable. as soon as the soviet union was no more, then bill clinton went full steam ahead, ran nato up to russias border, and unleashed financial parasites that tried to rape and break the nation up.
what did putin and his inner circle think would happen, if russia took its sovereignty serious?
marku
Interesting. It sure is a break from the prevailing globalist dream mantra. and I guess I can accept the inevitable “Putin Bad” nonsense.
But no mention of Gaza, as something, you, know, kind of breaks that whole respecting other nations stuff. And, “oh boy, a capital gains tax”. That always works!
But overall, at least surprising in its honesty. (Sort of like Trump!)
Also, some comments on X where the Canadian armed forces are advertising their response to a US invasion is guerilla war. Lots of Albertans saying “Legalize the guns we already have, and we will happily join the US. Also pissed about vax mandates and lockdowns, (tho the US did the same–no chance we will ever do that again!)
So, the same rural urban divide as in the US. Tho Albertans should be happy if Canada builds that pipeline to BC for tar sands export.
Scott
Look at and analyze Carny’s Davis manifesto in both managerial and political terms.
From a managerial point of view, Carney gets it right that the middle powers have to give up the illusion right now of the rules-based order and their obedient alliance with the United States as remaining beneficial.
They should independently band together for trade, political and defense purposes. There is no disagreement there.
His politics are neoliberal Cold War. And it is that understanding that must prompt us to have a critical resistance to Carney’s policies, while at the same time supporting Canadian independence from the US hegemon.
He listed Canada’s accomplishments as lowering taxes (on the rich), and being an energy superpower ( cooking the planet).
He still wants to fight Russia, on behalf of NATO in the Ukraine. He said nothing about ending Canada’s support for Israel’s genocide of Palestinians.
Carney did not say what the increased defense spending in Canada would be for, even though we know that the US is Canada’s number one potential enemy. I suspect he still wants to carry out Cold war politics against socialist and poor nations.
Canada’s global energy companies can still destroy communities and environments around the world and within Canada.
He made it clear at the beginning and at the end that he certainly doesn’t want the Canadian workers of the world uniting, which is anathema to banker Carney.
ventzu
KT Chong
Agree Russia knows that US tried to assassinate Putin. But they seem to cling to a belief that it is an out-of-control CIA, rather than authorised by Trump, Why else would Russia be entertaining another meeting with Witkoff and Kushner? There is a faction in Russia, which is keen to go back to making business deals with the West, and Putin seems to be influenced by them. And look how the Kremlin is celebrating Trump in his moves against Greenland – yes it is happy to see a US-EU split, but equally it is keen to get on side with Trump. If Putin joins Trump’s Bored of Peace, that will be irrefutable evidence.
And whilst Russia is allied with Iran, and seems to having helped them with the blocking of the Starlink terminals, there is a long-standing relationship with Israel and Netanyahu. A number of Russian oligarchs are Jewish and many Russians live in Israel. So whilst Russia clearly does not want the US on its doorstep in Iran, it will also not fully support Iran against Israel. If you remember, pre-Assad-downfall, Israeli airforce often bombed Syria with impunity, and the Russian’s did not use their air defence systems against them.
Feral Finster
@Mark Level: Carney is making some brave statements but seeking a reset with the Americans. “Just so you know, I have options!” is just way to say “please come back please….”
Hell, if Trump were replaced with a Team D president, expect Carney and the europoodles to come flocking back, all is forgiven!
@ spud: exactly correct concerning the Russian leadership. The phrase that goes around is that the Russian leadership would gladly sell all of Russia in exchange for a gelato in Tuscany.
different clue
I don’t think the memory-of-hegemony which Carney is accused by some of still buying into is the aMERican hegemony. I think it would be the legacy British Imperial hegemony. After all, British North America ( now Canada) stayed loyal to the British Crown during the American Revolutionary War period and aftermath, and many United Empire Loyalists left America in the aftermath and went to Canada.
And the American hegemony being referred to here is the successor to British Imperial hegemony crafted by Anglophiles who took control of American foreign policy sometime towards the very end of the 1800s. President Woodrow Wilson cemented this Anglophilic Britishoid hegemonism firmly into place with his machinations to get America into World War One ( on what some would say was the wrong side). Prior to that, the hegemony America sought was the Monroe Doctrine type hegemony over North and South America ( minus British North America) and the Caribbean Islands.
President Pedophile Piggy is spastically trying to revive that Monroevianly Doctrinoid vision in his own spastic way. Part of why he wants to invade and conquer Greenland is to get EUrope to expel America from NATO, after which he would care not-a-whit what would happen to the post-NATO left-behinds in EUrope. In such a scenario, the best outcome would be the rise of NEATO ( North East Atlantic Treaty Organization) or maybe NEATO Plus One ( Canada), which could maybe call itself NATO 2.0.
By the way, dara fox’s comment offers an interesting opening for some heartless bloodless thinking about how to rank different genocides in terms of bigness and also badness.
StewartM
You have leaders who can still give speeches there? Ours used to give halfway decent soundbytes, now they struggle to even deliver those.
I see a the usual share of nit-picking naysayers here. But overall, pretty dang good.
(Remember, FDR was elected in 1932 on a platform of balancing the budget. Don’t get too-focused on details, especially when the current is flowing the way it is.)
Purple Library Guy
There are certainly bits of the speech I can pull out that I don’t agree with. But overall, it is a better speech than any world leader has made in a long time, certainly better than I would have expected.
What’s interesting to me is that the international response seems like it’s been generally positive. European leaders seem to be at the point where maybe they didn’t have the guts to say that, but they’re happy someone did. Not long ago the reaction would have been “How could you say that in public?! I will now pretend vehemently that it’s not true!” Times are indeed changing.
Carney is still kind of bad with the domestic economy, probably worse than I expected. But I must admit he’s doing a good job with international.
Mark Level
Time for an update– I didn’t click on the Axios article (not worth my time) but the headline said enough. Trump “won’t” militarily conquer Greenland, his Davos speech said!?! WTF.
I have often compared Donnie to a Squid spilling ink everywhere just to confuse and confound. He seems to be back in Squid mode at the moment, not that that means anything 10 minutes later. I listened to an excellent Danny Haiphong piece with Aleister Crook, here’s another Donnie Spinning Plate– Crook said the Gaza “Board of Peace” has nothing to do with Gaza, it is really about trying to create an “alternative” world institution to the UN, which even though it has enabled the Gaza genocide (with small exceptions on the margins, e.g. Francesca Albanese, among others, now debanked and heavily sanctioned. US government just debanked Scott Ritter also), yet to Donnie the UN is just not supine enough!! Danny displayed an AI illustration of big Donnie ahead of li’l Narco and VP Vance planting a flag of US ownership in Greenland, “Established 2026” so again, squid ink and deliberate confusion. The AI was shared by Donnie himself.
I think most of us know that the US Treaty with Greenland dating back to WW II fully allows the US to add more bases, claim and remove resources, etc. (It might’ve included compensation for resources removed, we all know Donnie doesn’t do that.) Usually Donnie goes in for big Spectacles, a “war” would last a few days, if that, and he could have a “Win”, declare peace and his 9th Peace Victory for a future Nobel Piss Prize. (The one MC Mossado gave him is not recognized as his by Norway, but will look nice at his corporate HQ if/when he survives this term
Back to Carney: Kudos to his speechwriters, with whom this “balanced” defiance can be credited. Some people in Canada, likely Carney included know that to Donnie’s people, Greenland is just an hors d’oeuvre to warm up for the main meal of Canada. But again, Carney is a little, gray corporat entity, he has no vision and was splitting a difference here. If the Canadians were serious, they would be doing what Venezuela did, forming local militias, etc. Talk is cheap. Judging by the “slap” (it only fell short of a punch ‘coz S/he didn’t close her fist) that Brigette Macron gave to her teen-recruited hubby when the plane door opened, Brigette has far bigger balls than Carney ever will. (And yes, I know we have no idea why Venezuela allowed an attack largely unanswered and the extraction of Macron. Someday we may know.)
Wasn’t the 3rd Reich’s Annexation of Austria (like Russia’s of Crimea in 2014) done with nary a shot being fired? If Greenland is surrendered without US “Military action” needed (Trump’s Davos boast) would Canada really begin preparing for the next domino, them, to fight or fall? I guess we will see.
Now, responding to others on the thread– When I praised L&S’s response, it was only because he’s having a Harvey Dent good day on the comments viz Carney catering to luxury class drivers. But he shows the ugly, burnt face in his nonsense about “the Uighyrs” and “genocide.” Since debuting on here, L&S has been very selective in which “genocides” he opposes (the ones the US State Dept. tells him to) & which he supports. He raved about how Putin was preparing to suffer “one million more (sic) military deaths to take Keev” (none of which happened) and when I noted that 5 million Russians died prematurely when the US installed the drunken lout Yeltsin and the Chicago Boys to loot the Russian pensions, health care etc. he yawned with disinterest. Let’s see, 6 million Jews died in the Holocaust (a figure I accept) and that’s the worst injustice ever (forget the Armenians or Native Americans; how many of the latter were exterminated? far more than 6 million I’ll guarantee), that is horrible, but 23 million (or more) Russians died fighting the Reich, 5 million more in the early 90s is nothing worth bothering about to L&S.
I’m very dubious about any “Uighur genocide”, but some Jihadis have been jailed and some have undergone forced Maoist “re-education” I will certainly wager, and even endorse. Would L&S cry even las lagrimas del Cocodrilo (crocodile tears) over the Christians, Alawites, and several other minority groups being murdered or tortured by Uighur fanatics in Syria, L&S is surely fine with this, as Donnie has met Al Jolani in the Oval Office (sprayed him with a Donny perfume for advertising), Jolani who formerly butchered American troops as well as other is now a State Dept. ally and “hero.” Good on new commenter dara fox for intuitively knowing what a bullshitter L&S is. It depends which of his 2 faces is dominant that day, frankly, he can be smart in the initial part of the post, then unbelievably racist and stupid as in the 2nd half today.
I don’t like American Christo-Fascists, or Zio-Fascists, the militant Uighurs are exactly the same tribalist fanatics, sickening.
Edwin notes some good points about the Sunk Cost Fallacy and shoveling more billion$ into Failed State Ukraine, but the likes of Carney knows no better, obviously. There are massive layers of Denial in the Collective West Misleadership Class about this, even when 2 Quincey Institute “Realists”, George Beebe and Anatol Lieven, in the May 2024 Harper’s article “Coming to Terms” piece admitted Ukraine was doomed, they lacked the Realism of a John Mearsheimer and spit out all kinds of vain Hopium: continuing to speculate continued “aid” to sinking Ukraine would give the West “leverage” in future negotiations (19 months later, we know that’s a lie), or force moderates like Putin to give “Security Guarantees” to whatever tiny rump Ukrainian State remains. All absurd. And Carney and whatever “brain trust” he has are far more stupid and blinkered than these two are. One nice speech, watered-down, by Carney, does not a Winston Churchill make.
Many thanks to KT Chong for the push-back on ventzu’s comments today, and others who believe Russia will suddenly pull Defeat out of the Jaws of Victory. I will confess that Putin (not the sole authority in Russian policy) does clearly suffer a pro-Zionist bias for the 3 million Russians who live in the Zionist entity, however I think he can serve 2 Masters and not betray Iran when he knows Russia and China are next on the menu. KTC is correct. We used to have a commenter on here who went by “Ms. Jennings” who would beat this dead horse ad nauseum, openly claimed Putin would allow the destruction of Russia to protect the Zionist entity. That clearly didn’t happen, and we’ve heard nothing from MJ for many months.
Excellent insights from spud, as per the usual. I now have to correct something I said when TrumpCo chased an old, broken-down, empty oil freighter for 3 days to steal it from Russia, open piracy, also done in at least one case with China. The Duran recently noted that Russia recovered all but one or 2 of the pirate-grabbed ships (e.g. from France and other “mid-level” players), and they responded appropriately, despite my initial misgivings. A full blockade of Odessa has started, ships en route to Odessa being grabbed, along with shelling port and energy facilities, softening it up to take later. Russian Federation is keeping its Eyes on the Prize long-term, not overreacting to mosquito bites elsewhere. China will clearly react quietly but powerfully also.
In closing, Crook also noted that Donnie himself has stated that if he loses the House in the midterms, he believes he will be impeached and out on his ass. Now, this could be mistaken, the DimmieCraps are the Washington Generals of snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory, but we will see. I think the walls are closing in on the Reich, they’re destroying the USA and the Israel First and ICE slayings are turning even their own base against them, along with the Epstein cover-up. Trump needs some symbolic “Wins”, poor Greenland is just low-hanging fruit. I don’t see Canada being taken in the next 9 months, nor any other Wins on the horizon. And it won’t make any difference which branch of the Right Wing Duopoly is nominally ruling, the destruction of USA health care, infrastructure, environment and social solidarity will continue apace. Palantir, Amazon, Facebook and ZBS (formerly CBS) will try to drive the Narrative, until it collapses of its own weight.
Mark Level
The extraction of Maduro, not Macron!! Sometimes my fingers typing have a mind of their own, M & M confused.
Eric Anderson
Lot of people here missing the forest for the trees. Is Carney a neoliberal together with all the site that comes with it? Yes. Will he continue to be? Yes.
He’s only saying he’s not America’s neoliberal anymore.
Eric Anderson
Which, I’ll add, in itself has significant geopolitical repercussions if others follow his lead.
cc
Carney: “We aim to be principled and pragmatic – principled in our commitment to fundamental values: sovereignty and territorial integrity, the prohibition of the use of force except when consistent with the UN Charter, respect for human rights.”
Nice words, but:
When the US sent a raiding party to abduct the democratically-elected president of Venezuela and his wife in the middle of the night, murdering some 80 people in the process, including women and civilians, how is that not against every word he said above? Yet Carney and Canada did not condemn it. In fact, instead of condemning it, Carney even went to the trouble to write that Canada “welcomes the opportunity”.
Isn’t that a textbook case of continued hypocrisy, of still “living within the lie,” of keeping the sign in window, and of participating in the ritual (pretending that Venezuela is not democratic, going along with the complete fiction of “narco-terrorism” to get along with the US)?
Do we excuse Carney’s hands-over-eyes, hands-over-ears, and hands-over-mouth non-condemnation by looking at it as being “pragmatic in recognizing that progress is often incremental”?
What does that say about “our values”?
Now that the US is also more clearly making a move on Greenland, and Trump’s account just posted an image with the US flag covering over Venezuela, Greenland, AND Canada, isn’t it time for Canada to strongly condemn what the expansionist aggressor US state has done against Venezuela?
Carney says “When middle powers criticize economic intimidation from one direction but stay silent when it comes from another, we are keeping the sign in the window.”
So why does Canada continue to sanction Venezuela to assist the USA’s extreme economic intimidation of Venezuela? Aren’t we helping to hold Venezuela down while the US continuously hits her?
Carney should lift any sanctions that the Freeland-Trudeau regime imposed against Venezuela, and resume and increase trade ties with Venezuela.
How about doing “what we claim to believe in” and “reducing the leverage that enables coercion”?
Canadian establishment news media should also start dropping their pro-US euphemisms of the “capture of Maduro” or the “arrest of Maduro”, and properly report on the US overthrow and night-time abduction of the couple. They should be asking how this couple are being treated, whether they are even still in the US or were renditioned to Guantanamo Bay or some prison in the Honduras like ICE-detainees, whether they are being tortured and subjected to CIA “interrogation techniques” (ex. waterboarding torture.)
The ICE murder of that white American woman is just a small taste of what the US military does all the time to people in other parts of the world. Where was the Canadian TV news coverage of the US military’s murder of some 80 brown people in Venezuela in the course of their extremely violent abduction raid? In Orwell’s 1984, the Ministry of Truth was full of “memory holes”, slots for chutes leading to incinerators – that seems to be what Canadian news media chose to do in their “reporting” on the violent US attack against Venezuela.
Carney says: “It means acting consistently. Apply the same standards to allies and rivals.” So why is he not acting consistently when it comes to condemning the US thuggery against Venezuela?
NGG
MAGA Hats now popular in Greenland and Denmark now — Male America Go Away!
Priceless — At DAVOS Trump said no military invasion – just negotiations. Later followed by stating that New tariffs against countries that opposed takeover of Greenland CANCELLED. Middle countries unite. Or maybe the 850 point drop in the DOW got his attention. What a clustergaggle!
ventzu
Hi Mark Level
Just to clarify – I think Putin will decisively win in Ukraine – they already have. I’m just noting that from his perspective, it would be good for Russia to have friendly relations and business re-established with the US – and that is clearly what the oligarchs want. (The fact that Kiril Dimitriev, rather than Lavrov, is the go-between with Witkoff I think speaks to oligarch interests). If a US-Russia rapprochement happens, Russia may not be so focused on developing BRICS and may well sit on the fence in any US – China conflict.
As for Iran, Putin is clearly currently helping them, but if it appears that Iran is decimating Israel, my guess is that he will seek to restrain them.
Worth seeing John Helmer’s most recent interview on Dialogue Works – also linked on his website: https://johnhelmer.net
Like & Subscribe
Dara,
Thank you for your reasonable, well-reasoned, professional rebuttal. You made compelling and persuasive points that I have truly considered and taken to heart..
Kindest Regards,
Like & Subscribe
KT Chong
It’s wishful thinking that Russian oligarchs could steer Putin toward the West because of their personal interests. That ship sailed years ago.
The last 4–5 years of sanctions, decoupling, and asset seizures have pushed Russian oligarchs firmly into China’s orbit. Their deals, wealth, and survival are now tied to China, not the U.S. or the West. Ironically, Western actions have seized and stripped away whatever influence, interests, and trust they once had in the West, forcing them to reorient toward China. The idea that oligarchs could or would sway Russia away from China is simply outdated.
KT Chong
Russia’s Current Trade and Economic Orientation
1. China is now Russia’s largest trading partner
• China accounted for roughly 31 % of Russia’s exports and 39 % of imports in 2024, far more than any Western partner — or the entire West combined.
• The EU — as a whole — accounted for around 11 % of Russia’s trade in 2024, while U.S.–Russia trade was a rounding error compared with China.
• Oligarch impact: Many oligarch-linked energy, mining, and industrial firms now sell to China as their primary buyer or supplier. Their revenue streams and investment returns depend on keeping good relations with Chinese partners. Compared to Americans and Europeans, Chinese customers are way more reliable.
2. Trade has grown rapidly since 2022
• Russia–China trade jumped from around $190 billion in 2022 to over $240 billion in 2023.
• Oligarch impact: The rapid growth offers lucrative contracts and joint ventures that Western markets no longer provide. Oligarchs have strong financial incentives to stay aligned with China.
3. China dominates Russian imports
• Chinese exports made up 53% of Russia’s imports in 2023, up from 26 % in 2021, while Western imports declined.
• Oligarch impact: Russian elites make money from sourcing machinery, technology, and materials from China. Why would they want to jeopardize that?
4. Use of non‑Western currencies
• Around 99% of Russia–China settlements in 2025 are now in rubles and renminbi.
• Oligarch impact: Their finances are tied directly to Chinese-controlled systems. Access to global liquidity is now mediated through China. They’ve spent the past decade adapting/adjusting to this system — they’re not going to throw it away just because America wants them back.
KT Chong
Conclusion:
The linkage between Russian oligarchs and Chinese interests isn’t just opportunistic or temporary anymore — it’s now firmly INSTITUTIONALIZED in Russia. Since 2014, Russian elites have been steadily building ties with China through trade, investment, and strategic partnerships. The past four years, since the Ukraine War, accelerated this process dramatically, as sanctions, decoupling, and asset seizures forced oligarchs to pivot almost entirely toward China. Today, their wealth, business networks, and survival are structurally tied to Chinese interests — not the West.
capelin
Sounds good. Moving even.
Then one remembers, he’s an elite central banker, friend of prince Andrew, Liberal insider, leader of a country complicit in genocide his whole tenure, an arms-spending ramper-upper, a true believer in the Great Reset.
The whole thing is a variation on what, for me, has been one of Ian’s enduring political lessons – create bad conditions, and eventually a “strong man on horseback” rides in and conveniently saves the day; the people welcome it.
Thus Ian predicting T-rump, even before T-rump ran.
Before, T was the strong man. Now he’s the bad conditions.
And Calm Grey Carnage has saddled up.
More societal churn.
C’mon, lill’ doggies, git mooovin…elbows up… there ya go… c’mon..
Mark Level
Hey Ventzu, thank you for a reply which is thoughtful and civil. I agree with you much of the time, perhaps above 70%, but differ strongly from your claims at some areas of the margins.
For an example of knee-jerk dismissal of valid claims, see L&S’s sarcastic, condescending dismissal of Dara, without any specifics or humility. I have to wonder since L&S is such a big fan of the Uighur extremists who throw acid in the faces of women and teen girls who don’t wear a head covering, or face covering or burka, how he feels about a woman calling him out. L&S once mentioned going to the Recycling Center with his wife, I certainly feel bad for anyone who could put up with his irrelevant rages against certain groups and love of violence. I forget the name of the man who started acid attacks against women and girls in Afghanistan who was later recruited by Oliver North to do jihad against Russian troops in the mid-80s. I’m amazed anyone commenting on IWN has such evident sympathies.
Getting back to your suspicions viz Putin or Russia (I don’t want to misrepresent what you say), I just came across this item viz Russian planes “dangerously” buzzing an American warship “training” a Polish helicopter inh the Baltic Sea. I think the gloves are coming off.
https://abcnews.go.com/International/russian-fighters-buzz-us-navy-destroyer-close-range/story?id=38364404
For the record, I cannot imagine Russia would ever cut ties with their strongest ally, China, to cut ANY kind of financial ties with the Agreement-Incapable US Empire. They can’t be that venal or stupid, and they don’t NEED anything from the US, whereas they do from China.
Oh and things keep moving viz Western sellouts JOINING Trump in stealing Greenland. Danny Haiphong just played a clip of the sub-moron Mark Rutte at Davos cheering on Trump seizing Greenland from the Asiatic Chinese-Russian demons.
I never like to cite the BBC, but with respect to the acid attacks, I feel including this link is illustrative. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-61402309
Personally I’m a pagan, but of the 3 Abrahamic religions I have the greatest respect for Islam, for a variety of reasons that I won’t waste time sharing. But some things cannot ever be defended, clearly.
Carborundum
Shorter American commentariat: “I am outraged by the lack of doctrinal purity shown. How dare Canadians consider least-bad options to further their national interest. They must go down as gloriously aflame as we do.”
No thanks.
BC Nurse Prof
Good discussions here. To add to the mix, here is another perspective:
https://bryanmoir.substack.com/p/the-standing-ovation-trap
“Mark Carney’s World Economic Forum speech will be remembered for its applause. It shouldn’t be.
The standing ovation at the WEF will be cited as proof of brilliance, but it obscures a deeper shift Carney has been outlining for years — one that redefines sovereignty, democracy, and economic governance itself.
We should not, in fact, be surprised by it at all.
Carney outlined this worldview years ago in Value(s). The WEF speech is not a departure from that book; it is its execution.”
StewartM
NGG
Priceless — At DAVOS Trump said no military invasion – just negotiations. Later followed by stating that New tariffs against countries that opposed takeover of Greenland CANCELLED. Middle countries unite. Or maybe the 850 point drop in the DOW got his attention. What a clustergaggle!
Yeah, for someone who’s supposed to be the friend of the of the asset owner class, Trump sure screws his very backers, no? It’s almost like he runs the country like, like, like….one of his businesses. Into the ground.
Maybe that’s because despite his supposed business creds, he doesn’t know what businesses really value; things like stability and predictability. No business likes planning for the future then having to have everything turned upside down due to a 3 am X tweet.
The irony is that most of those asset owners would actually be better off under someone like Bernie’s policies. Sure, they wouldn’t like the higher taxes and regulation and stuff, but at least things would be stable and predictable.
mago
cc rider, sometimes you gotta let it go and just keep on moving on
got nothing to say nothing to do but keep on going into that not so gentle night
while everybody’s talking and nobody knows
we’re dreaming in foreign landscapes and speaking in tongues while gospel preachers juggle serpents and shout repent your evil ways
sure man, where’s the exit
over there over here
what’s that those devos divas say
O Canada O Greenlandia omigod.
Sweet dreams
ventzu
Thanks KTC and Mark for taking the time to respond. Perhaps I have too much of a pessimistic bent! After 500+ years of colonialism and neocolonialism . . .!
Mark, for what it is worth, I agree with you re: western propaganda on China and the Uighurs. It is part and parcel of portraying China as the evil empire.
Like & Subscribe
No business likes planning for the future then having to have everything turned upside down due to a 3 am X tweet.
Really? I beg to differ. If they didn’t like that, Trump would have been Six Feet Under long ago. Instead, they gave him a second term. So, you’re wrong and your thinking is antiquated. They not only don’t not like Trump’s smoke and mirrors chaos, but in fact they love it.
What is lost in all of this because Trump steals the show every time with his smoke and mirrors chaos is the fact that this is Davos we are talking about. I remember in years past the so-called “left” would protest this elitist meeting and now they’re cheering on the elitist pigs at Davos because they allegedly are united against Trump and America which of course we know is not true and is in fact purely performative — Macron is wearing those sunglasses to hide the fact he is winking all the way. If there is such a thing as TDS, THIS is TDS — siding with the elitists at Davos because their Golem has you enthralled and mesmerized.
Carborundum
A couple of things struck me while thinking about this last night and this morning.
One, I think the housing bubbles are much bigger than monetary policy. Thinking about what China did with housing when they had plentiful supply of cheap money versus what we did (speaking here of the Canadian market – I don’t know the UK very well). Shockingly, they built housing at scale.* We, on the other hand, allowed every level of government to create roadblocks to neutralize the policy levers of the other two and make the situation materially worse at every turn. Turns out that policy by wedge polling-shaped press releases turns into a circular firing squad really quickly. Who could have known?
I don’t know that they would make this argument, but I could see central bankers making a cogent argument that their job is to ensure that financial markets function effectively even in boundary conditions. What business and government decide to transact in those markets is on them. I wonder if we don’t lay a lot of blame at the feet of central banks that is properly assigned to regulatory and particularly to policy failure. Most of the policy and regulatory focus seems to be, to borrow the metaphor Carney used, on keeping the sign in the window instead of setting the conditions for a well-functioning political economy to thrive.
Two, I dug around and found Trudeau’s keynote at Davos (about two and a half years into his first mandate): https://www.pm.gc.ca/en/news/speeches/2018/01/23/prime-minister-keynote-speech-world-economic-forum-2018
Pretty severe contrast. What an empty-headed platitude mouther. It speaks volumes that the most noted aspect of his attendance this year is that he’s there with Katy Perry. Supposedly he’s giving everyone his well-coiffed perspective on soft power, which, dude – read the fucking room.
* In this domain like a number of others, their key challenge would seem to me to be catastrophic success. Have they pulled a Japan and overbuilt massively for the demographics, or will their psychosocial powerhouse of a population grow into the infrastructure?
Carborundum
L & S, you are just wrong with the notion that business likes this level of uncertainty. My kid works international supply chain for US firms right now and it’s absolute carnage out there. Even more of a policy fail than Enduring Freedom and most of GWOT and that’s a damned high bar to clear.
The only reason you’re not in official deep recession coupled with a steep market selloff right now is interlocking grifts and the complacency of a retail investor class sitting on unparalleled wealth that is mainly either legacy from preceding generations or robbed from youth. Eating the seed corn is not a feast.
Like & Subscribe
Carb, we will have to agree to disagree. You mention legacy. Your’s is a legacy perception of business — what business, or much of business, once was. “Business” is not a monolith. It’s not a static proposition, either, but instead dynamic. There is a growing trend in business to embrace chaos as opportunity which is the direct result of increasingly focusing on short-term gains versus long-term consistency and predictability.
The following clip underscores the new, emerging maxim in business. Current and future successful business entrepreneurs are embracing it as their mantra.
Chaos Reigns
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09xs24OmNHc
Carborundum
Sorry, but I’m not going to just obligingly passively disagree while you push stuff that isn’t true. Is there a cohort who make their living off the market that likes this? Absolutely – and they are very well-represented in the Trump administration. But the bulk of businesses, people that make real things and provide real services? No, no way.
Trump “steals the show” as you put it in large part because of the blizzard of poorly informed assertions being constantly sprayed out there. Propaganda in the modern moment isn’t about getting people to believe a specific lie – it’s about inciting a crop of useful idiots desperate for audience share to flood so much shit into the zone that people have cognitive buffer over-run and latch on to whatever is on offer that matches their pre-conceptions of the moment.
different clue
Many years ago I used to get Cable TV. And the Cable offered a couple of CSPAN channels. They provided me part of my viewing entertainment.
I remember one time a prominent Glibertarian Spin Mill was hosting a big grand conference about economic something-or-other. One of the guests on the stage was Lawrence Bossidy , the Chairman or CEO or maybe both of Allied Signal Corporation.
At question time, one of the Spin Mill operators asked him a biased leading question about taxes designed businness would like some more yet tax cuts please. Mr. Bossidy either missed the point or dodged the point of the question. He said that he didn’t care whether his company’s taxes were cut some more, left the same, or raised some. What he wanted was for the tax rates and laws to be left strictly unchanged in any way for enough years at a time to where Allied Signal Corporation would be able to do multi-year planning without suffering rug-pull after destabilizing rug-pull ( my paraphrasing).
Allied Signal was a productive industrial bussiness which made real things.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlliedSignal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Bossidy
As a mere bi-weekly wage-earning layman, I can only suspect that thingmaking or service-providing businesses would in general like stable background conditions to be able to plan within.
Ethical-Mafia businesses would like instability to be able to trade against or lend against or sell phoney shares into, or other ethical-mafia tricks. But even after all that has happened, the ethical-mafia businesses are not the only businesses in the field of business. ( If crime is legalized, is it still crime?)
different clue
I would need more time to think about all the different things in cc’s comment up above, but one little thing caught my eye which my intuition suggests an immediate answer for.
Here is the question: ” So why does Canada continue to sanction Venezuela to assist the USA’s extreme economic intimidation of Venezuela? Aren’t we helping to hold Venezuela down while the US continuously hits her? ”
Because the huge tar reserves in the Alberta tar sands are a similar kind of tar to Venezuela’s tar reserves in the Orinoco tar sands. And the less ( or no) Orinoco tar that Venezuela is able to mine and sell on into the future, the more ( or way more) Alberta tar that Canada will be able to sell into that same future.
But that’s just muh feelz on the matter.