Let there be no doubt, Trump is the symptom, not the problem. Vance is the President in Waiting (I predict he will be POTUS after the November elections), and he will be far worse then Trump ever could be. Trump is knee-jerk, Vance is cold and calculating.
But the good news is, based on the mud-slinging the Republican party is doing, they are really. really afraid they will lose the Senate AND the House in November, and they are trying to shore up support in America for their failed policies. They really, really need this trade deal, and Carney knows it. Unless they get a trade deal before November, the American political scene will look very, very different.
As hyperbolic as this is, I am concerned by how many Canadians dismiss this out of hand. I know many of you haven’t had to actually think about imperialism until quite recently, but how do you think the US got into such an advantageous position over the Canadian state? Did it not occur to you at all in these past decades that US ownership over so much Canadian businesses and resources, and the converse dependency Canada has on US finance and commodities constituted a power imbalance that could he weaponized? What about the fact that virtually all internet information platforms are moderated and surveilled by US corporations, or that the majority of hardware brands are American-owned?
They’re saying it in such a blunt way to correctly assert that the US can exercise that power imbalance to its benefit. Even if Carney’s diversification strategy works, we’re going to see a massive shift in the cost of living in Canada in the meantime, and it is already beyond tolerance for many of us. This is not good, and this is what people have warned against for decades since the neoliberal era began.
Edit: refer below for a description on what “neoliberalism” is, as I get the impression there’s many people here who may not understand what that term means and think that the word “liberal” is just some vague attack on the Liberal Party (which, make no mistake, they are neoliberals) or “progressives.”
The Avro Arrow was canceled by a Conservative government. Completely shoots down your neoliberal argument.
…neoliberal doesn’t mean, “Federal Liberal Party of Canada.” It is a set of politics that emerged in the late 20th century which rearticulates the classical liberal, “laissez-faire” rationalizations for massive wealth stratification and privatization of public works as an attack on the more welfare liberal policies and programs of the post-depression era. Reagan is the most famous advocate for this form of economic policy and is often (wrongly) credited for its formulation. It is characterized not by “small government” as many of its advocates say, but by the privatization of previously state-owned or operated programs and services. Canada’s “mixed” economy is a great example of this form of policy exactly because it follows the philosophy that public capital is more efficiently spent through private hands, or at the very least through the logics of capitalist efficiency. So, when you see Conservative and Liberal governments defunding say, education or medical in favour of privatized “efficiency,” that is an element in neoliberal politics. Or, when you consider that Carney’s “sovereignty” fund is essentially a funnel moving public wealth into privately owned fossil fuel and mining corporations. With that in mind, it means that even policies related to business are subject to the capitalist imperatives of profit maximization, infinite growth, and simply the private wealth interests of individual policy makers.
So, I’m not sure why the Avro Arrow project failed, but I know it was cancelled in 1959, roughly a decade and a half before the neoliberal era that I am describing. From what I recall, the second proposal during the Harper admin was cut due to to concerns over cost, which would potentially reflect neoliberal rhetoric, but I don’t know enough about aircraft design to speculate on whether that was a realistic estimate of it. But, the fact that Canada does supply its airforce with an assortment of privately owned companies for British-, Euro-, and American-made planes exemplifies how investment in those companies also creates an incentive for any investors in the admin to vote against a nationalized project.
Look up terms before you say shit like this or presume to know better than others when you clearly should be questioning how you understand these things.
Edit: Notice how they didnt comment under this one, but rather my response to a different commenter.
Avro failed because it was overtime, over budget and even if they did finish it, it was already out of date.
And then Eisenhower told Deifenbaker to shut it all down. The PC party always represents US interests in Canada. Mulroney then sold off Canadian assets and sucked Reagan harder than Nancy.
If you’re suggesting that a conservative killing a good project is not proof that the conservative era is filled with bad decisions, then I’m just confused.
(I’m assuming neoliberals is jargon for short-sighted oppositional-defiant conservative snowflakes, but I can never get it right)
Refer to my other comment above for a description of what it is. How tf did both of you see a term you didn’t understand, and did not think to simply look it up?
The Avro Arrow thing was a weird example they brought up because they also misunderstood what “neoliberal” meant, but it could potentially reflect neoliberal politics in that a renewal of the project in 2011 was cancelled by the Harper admin over cost concerns, which is a reasoning neoliberals use often.
I am entirely aware of neoliberalism. You might want to research the Avro Arrow. The Avro Arrow was the premiere Canadian industrial project in the 50’s, It was a collaborative effort by the Canadian government and Canadian private industry (Avro) to develop the world’s most advanced fighter AND commercial jet aircraft known at the time. The concept had advanced as far as the production stage for the commercial version (Avro Jetliner). The military version was at the final design stage, with prototypes being built. The Conservative government under Diefenbaker pulled the plug on it, and basically put a very progressive and influential Canadian company (Avro) out of business and chased top level Canadian engineers and scientists South to work for NASA and other American aviation firms. It was arguably the most massive brain drain Canada has ever seen. It singularly destroyed any hope of Canada having an world class aviation industry independent of the Americans and beyond American control, while at the same time ensuring NASA and the other American ‘aviation giants’ had the best intellectual minds known at the time. NASA would never have made it to the Moon without these Canadian giants. The Conservative government pulled the plug on it expressly because the American government at the time gave dire warnings that if it continued America would ‘gut’ Canada, and Dief the Chief’ caved in. The publicly stated reason was that Canada could no longer afford it as it was soaking up all investment capital and public money, but then made a complete falsity of this argument by insisting every last scrap of the project from machinery, blueprints, any and all completed assemblies, and all design documents to not just be scrapped but to be completely destroyed, shredded and crunched into bits of metal. He wanted the project to be completely wiped off the face of the earth, no trace remaining. As you stated this was well before the term ‘neoliberalism’ was even thought about. Neoliberalism has absolutely nothing to do with Canada’s current position and was not a factor in creating it. It goes back a lot farther than anything you stated. Your neoliberal rant is nothing but hot air.
Okay so, firstly, go actually read the comment you’re responding to. You’re making mistakes here that I specifically adressed from your first comment. Go look up what it means, seriously, you’ll see that my description is actually pretty useful.
None of this relates to neoliberalism since, again, it doesn’t just mean, “when a government does things.” But I can see more clearly here that you brought up something less relevant than say, the past fifty years of public spending and international economic policy, because you misunderstand the influence the US has over Canada as being primarily in terms of military power, which is not what I referred to even once. Imperialism does not just manifest as military might, it is a complex system of power that involves political, cultural, and economic subordination, which is why neoliberalism has been so prominent in imperialistic spaces like the US, Canada, EU, UK, Australia, Japan, etc. over the past fifty years. This plane project seems to intersect with some special interest you have, but I’m afraid that doesn’t mean that it is the most effective or useful way to understand this topic. You also seem to think I said “imperialism” began in the 1980s, which, no, I didn’t, and it’s very unreasonable to draw that from what I said. It is literally objective fact that people have warned against this power imbalance since the neoliberal era began; go look up CUSFTA and NAFTA discourses. This isn’t even something debatable, and I know you don’t understand what you’re arguing against because of that.
Before you spew some more, y’know, read this comment first, but I’d like you to please find some sources to corroborate the incredible claim that fifty years of public and economic policy has “absolutely nothing to do with canada’s current position,” as it is about as an unsubstantiated claim that anyone could make. Even if just because Mark Carney, the current Prime Minister of Canada, subscribes to neoliberal politics and has occupied positions of power both in the UK and Canada over the past two decades. You don’t know enough about this dude, ffs.
Like I said, nothing but hot air. The Avro Arrow fiasco sent a clear message to every University engineer and science grad, and every Canadian company. I know, I was there. We learned: Rule number one, your future is in America, Rule number two, if you think otherwise, see rule number one. The Canadian government will never stand behind you, it will always pull the plug. The last fifty years of public and economic policy may be as far back as your mind can grasp, and even longer than your memory can trace, but history and my memory go a lot further back than that. Fifty years isn’t even a life span.Neoliberalism is for children. Reality is for adults. History never falls into neat classifications and sound bites.
I don’t know why you’re being so self-righteous when you’re just another STEM unc who doesn’t know what they’re talking about and refuses to learn. Nothing about your behaviour says, “mature.”
You’ll learn what neoliberalism is in three years when your kids put you in a home.
When you decide to wear big-boy pants, then maybe we can have an intelligent adult conversation, but throwing insults and vitriol around just puts you in the same league as Trump.