Welcome to the Canadoper Café, 2025!

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
261

Perhaps, in true Canadian fashion, we may agree to disagree on this.

I’d suggest that trade agreements favour some groups and hurt others and how one views them depends on the costs one pays and the benefits one receives. Who is listened to as we weigh these costs and benefits is a matter of political influence more than objective analysis and overall good.

And I would still suggest that without economic sovereignty, political sovereignty is not very meaningful and independent culture becomes merely symbolic. It has been a long time since any Canadian political party has suggested a real course of action to secure economic independence. This is because political parties listen to the money, and the money has little interest in Canada as anything but a marketing ploy and, sometimes, as a protected zone for particular industries that fear outside competition.

262

What exactly is Economic Sovereignty or Economic Independence?

263

On the run, so quickly and imprecisely, the ability of a political community, including the nation-state, to make democratic decisions about the economic resources it has nominal authority and control over in the interests of that community as it defines them without regard to the desires of foreign governments or capital.

264

That’s true. But I didn’t know about other countries.

265

Happy Flag Day!

266

A blast from the past:

267

But Canada has that.

Signing treaties with other countries is not a surrender of sovereignty. I mean, don’t you think American wackos who shriek about organizations like the UN or WHO taking away their sovereignty are, well, wackos? I hope so, because they are.

Canada could always exit USMCA. We could always pull out of the WTO. We could cancel CIFTA or any of the dozens of other agreements we have. We enter these agreements because it’s smart to do so and in our interest, and we can cancel them if it’s in our interest.

268

To a point. Countries joining the EU now must agree to adopt the Euro (when their economic house is in order), allow freedom of movement and join the Schengen area (when they have proper external border controls in place), and adopt a raft of regulations to harmonize everything from product labels to banking rules. Admittedly joining the EU is more than just the average treaty, but it drove Brexit and that was with the UK grandfathered in remaining outside both the Euro bloc and Schengen.

269

The CBC has an analysis of the current security situation with regard to Trump’s hostilities (link below). One take-away from it is that Canada’s allies (notably the UK and France) are intentionally laying low so as not to escalate the situation by antagonizing the belligerent idiot. But it’s pretty clear that they’re carefully watching. The article also contained this line that I had not heard about before, which sounds like it may be anticipating the dissolution of NATO and the disappearance of the US as an ally::

Canada and the EU are currently negotiating a defence and security pact, but the Liberal government has said very little about its scope and intention.

270

I’ve said it before: the UK, as a NATO ally, should quietly dispatch two nuclear-weapons equipped subs, to guard Halifax and Esquimault. Very quietly. If Trump threatens militarily, they can surface and say, “Are you sure you want to attack a NATO ally? We’re here, if you do.”

And there are always British soldiers at CFB Suffield. Not many, but perhaps enough to make a difference in some way.

271

Whatever one may think of Poilievre, I approve of his speech:

We will bear any burden and pay any price to protect the sovereignty and independence of our country …

… “We are slow to anger and quick to forgive. But never confuse our kindness for weakness. We are mild-mannered and made of steel,” before adding, “Sometimes it does take a threat to remind us what we have, what we could lose and what we could become.”

272

Sorry, I’m not buying what he’s selling. I don’t trust him. At all. The Conservatives talk tough and will be all bluster, but I believe, come down to it they’d gleefully roll over for any power position in any new government. They’d be delighted to wield that kind of power.

Conservatives and Republicans are cut from the same cloth, to my mind. Ours are jealous of the kind of total power they hold.

I feel the same about Ford, if he’s in Washington, he’s probably talking tough to cameras, and sucking up when in private. It just seems like Trump is everything they long to be. Mostly, all powerful!

273

I think one has to keep things in perspective. I have no reason to support Poilievre and lots of reasons not to, but whether one trusts him or not, I really doubt that he’s a traitor who, if elected, would be in cahoots with Trump. I think at worst he’d turn out to be a poor leader who didn’t adequately counter Trump’s tariff threats, but not because of malice. To think that conservatives are automatically traitors is rather paranoid; they tend to favour a strong economy, it’s just that they’re often too stupid or corrupt to know how to achieve it.

Of course conservative pundit and noted Dragons Den and Shark Tank panelist Kevin O’Leary thinks it would be terrific if Canada joined the US, but O’Leary isn’t running for office and is certifiably insane.

274

My recollection is that during his short-lived leadership run (the contest that Scheer won), he was criticising Harper and previous PMs for not keeping the provinces in line, and how he would crack the whip and get them to follow his instructions.

It was quite clear he thought that the provinces were subsidiaries of the federal government and subject to federal direction. That one comment demonstrated how unfit he was for politics, as he didn’t understand Canadian federalism at all.

275

The entire point of a ballistic missile submarine is that no one knows where they are. It would entirely defeat their purpose and mission to announce where they were going. They give a middle power like the UK a nuclear deterrent that is essentially undestroyable.

The British nuclear deterrent works from almost anywhere. It doesn’t matter where they are. They could nuke the USA from the Norwegian Sea. The only question is whether Britain would start a nuclear war to retaliate against an invasion of Canada. I do not believe they would.

If they wanted to actually help defend those ports, attack submarines and their conventional weapons are very dangerous things. (Or Canada should buy some.)

276

We’re getting into pretty fanciful hypotheticals here, but on this subject, nuclear weapons that magically either appeared in Canada or could be threatened on behalf of Canada would be completely useless.

The deterrent power of nuclear weapons lies in the plausibility of their possible deployment. This was very much the case with Russia in the Ukraine conflict, where the threat was that direct Western intervention in Ukraine could result in Ukraine being wiped out in a nuclear holocaust.

This is not the case in any conceivable Canada-US conflict. Canada possessing nuclear weapons would not be a deterrent, because if ever used, the US response would truly be an Armageddon – for both countries.

But thanks to the Orange Peril, at least we’re talking now about nuclear Armageddon. :roll_eyes:

277

Perhaps we differ in our assessment of how much power economic elites hold over the government and how little these elites care for Canada as a community and culture. My sense is these elites and the government are not very representative of Canada as a whole and make decisions that reflect their narrow interests. I would argue this was true at the time of confederation and has not much changed since. So while in theory the Canadian government has the ability to exercise economic sovereignty, it is unlikely to assert that ability when economic elites think otherwise.

278

Pierre has been an effective opposition leader, save a few missteps, and I think he will likely win the next election. It is unclear if he has any sensible ideas or a more mature governance mode. But I do not doubt his Canuckitude and agree with his words.

279

The problem is, in this moment right now, it’s a no-brainer that any politician currently looking towards an election in the near future is gong to come out as More Captain Canuck Than Thou. Public reaction to Trump’s 51st state bullshit is so widespread, and visceral, that no one smart enough to have ever been elected before would miss it, or think they can come down on the “other” side of the issue.

So what they’re saying about it (particularly in just this moment) is meaningless.

PP’s past actions, particularly around the Convoy period, and his aping of US MAGA talking points over the last few years tells me he can’t be trusted to put Canada’s interests first, even if he doesn’t commit literal treason. There’s so many things he could do to hurt us, short of actual treason, and we can’t lose sight of that.

280

My somewhat erratic, but generally reliable, memory banks suddenly came up with some 50+ years old trivia about Justin Trudeau.

You all remember Peter Gzowski? of course you do, you CBC mavens, you.

But do you remember that before Morningside, he had an earlier run on CBC called This Country in the Morning?

Similar to Morningside, but a bit more rambunctious. (Then he left CBC Radio for that tv talkshow, 90 Minutes Dead!)

My mom listened to Morningside every day and would tell us at supper what Peter was talking about.

Anyway, way back in 1972, shortly after the birth of the future PM, Peter ran a limerick contest. He gave the first line, and invited listeners to complete the limerick, mailing in their entries. (Yes, yes, postage stamps, envelopes, a two week deadline for entries, the whole bit).

The first line that Peter offered to his listeners to complete:

“There once was a baby named Justin…”

And the winner was (spoilered in case any of you want to take a crack at doing your own limerick first):

There once was a baby named Justin,
Whose didies were loaded and bustin’.
“It’s time for a change”,
Said a voice sad and strange,
“And Stanfield’s the name you can trust in.”