For all of the confusion about where the Ottawa-Washington meltdown will lead, one thing seems certain. The big winners of this diplomatic collapse will be China and other repressive dictatorships eager to become our new “strategic” partners and further undermine the world’s stabilizing democracy bloc.
Opinion piece by Charles Burton, former diplomat at Canada’s embassy in Beijing, senior fellow at Sinopsis.cz, a China-focused think tank based in Prague, Czech Republic. He is and author of 'The Beaver and the Dragon: How China Out-Manoeuvred Canada’s Diplomacy, Security and Sovereignty'.
...
Beijing in particular wants to inherit Canada’s economic dependence. Establishing such a broader North American beachhead will only further President Xi Jinping’s resolute goal of displacing the U.S. as a global hegemon, and cementing a China-dominated world order whose very foundation is the rejection of democratic freedoms and human rights.
...
If Canada ever reaches a point where attacks on our economy put families’ livelihoods at stake, then standing firm on our moral principles will give way to tolerating – or at least ignoring – human rights abuses in exchange for restoring Canadian prosperity through trade and investment with the likes of Qatar, Saudi Arabia and China. As someone who has been sanctioned by both Beijing and Moscow for standing up for Canadian democratic and civil values in global affairs, this prospect is deeply troubling.
...
When Mr. Xi makes a landmark trip to North America next month, it is expected he will add a Canadian stop, the first time in 16 years a Chinese head of state has visited this country. And this at a time when there have been calls for Ottawa to scrap restrictions on importing Chinese-made EVs, to locate Chinese auto factories here, and to even encourage Canadians to buy “Great Wall wine” instead of Californian.
In contrast to the belligerent threats that Canadians have been conditioned to expect from Washington, the Chinese President will project dignity and a tone of respect and goodwill toward Prime Minister Mark Carney and his Canadian business associates, who will be offering a warm welcome to the Chinese delegation.
But like Howitt’s “Spider and the Fly,” in which a cunning spider uses seduction and manipulation to lure a fly into its web, Canada should be wary of those who wield flattery and charm to disguise other intentions. Rushing to embrace China’s expansionist and calculating totalitarian regime will never work out well for Canada’s overall interest.
In the current hostile landscape, Canada could find itself deeply regretting coming out of an American frying pan into a Chinese fire.
...
128 Comments
grey_maniac@lemmy.ca · 28 pts · 2d
The US has never been a stabilizing democracy. They have been one of the foremost instigators of destabilization for almost a century. And the research is also clear that US citizens' majority policy concerns only get addressed if they align with corporate policy concerns. So neither stabilizing, nor an actual democracy.
My knee-jerk "um actually" response aside, China's ability to strategize at long time horizons lends credence to some of his points. For long-term survival, Canada will need to build multiple independent tradepartnerships to remove any single points of failure.
mrdown@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 2d
Democracy do not exists we are in a system where the lobbies and oligarchy rule
OliveBrittle@piefed.ca · 24 pts · 2d
"Yeah, the person I'm married to threatens me, punishes me, insults me, and doesn't value my consent, but it's better than what the other person could be"
Literal battered woman syndrome. Look, I don't like China or want more trade with them either, but can we please stop pretending doing business with them will be worse than doing business with the U.S.? One keeps their issues much more domestic than the other? I don't see China raising world oil prices by bombing Iran, raising my cost of living with absurd tariffs, or going back on their word.
We struck a deal with them, and they removed duties for our canola, crab, peas, and lobster for us letting in their EVs, which opens us up for job creation should they bring manufacturing operations here. In turn, we were made exempt from visa requirements to travel to China. I can see the benefits of that deal because they up the income of our farmers and fishers, open up job potential, and make travelling across the world easier for us.
That is how you strike a deal. They are reliable, the U.S. is not, plain and simple. If this guy's opinion is that China wants less democracy in the world, then I'd like to point to the amount of dictators America backs and has instated. Let's stop pretending that only one pulls that crap when they both do.
chonglibloodsport@lemmy.ca · 8 pts · 2d
China doesn’t just keep their issues domestic.
jerkface@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 1d
I don't understand why we all just forgot this so quickly.
Scotty@scribe.disroot.org · -14 pts · 2d
No, they aren't. China even imposed tariffs on Canadian pea starch in back in June (so you statement is wrong in this), and this is by far not the worst. The Chinese government's coercive tactics are well-known across the globe, and so are its human rights violations.
OliveBrittle@piefed.ca · 17 pts · 2d
Again, I reiterate.
Who is irrationally increasing the cost of living across the globe, specifically with gas prices?
Who else is committing human rights violations, domestically and abroad, and is actively backing those abuses in other countries?
Also that's specifically for pea starch, whole peas and other pea products are still good to go, that's far from going back completely on their word, which a certain other country has done countless times.
Pea sales to China strong despite new starch tariff
If I'm taking anybody's word, it's the president of Pulse Canada.
goodguys9@lemmy.ca · 18 pts · 2d
What are we supposed to do, not defend ourselves? China isn't making annexation threats against Canada. They're terrible on human rights records, but they're less overtly dangerous to Canada than the U.S. is with sharing a border. I can't see any future where China tries to annex Canada.
jerkface@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 1d
China does influence Canadian elections, makes demands regarding our internal politics, has agents in Canada stalking and harassing Canadian citizens for political reasons; they may not be trying to claim our territory but they do not recognize our sovereign authority over it when their interests don't align with that.
I'm not arguing for USA over China, but that's a false dichotomy to begin with. We don't have to compromise.
Objection@lemmy.ml · 16 pts · 2d
I'm pretty sure that... inhales
Mexico, Samoa, Hawaii, the Philippeans, Columbia, Hondurus, Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Greece, Costa Rica, Albania, Syria, Egypt, Guatemala, Iran, Indonesia, Iraq, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Congo, Guyana, Brazil, Chile, Bolivia, Angola, East Timor, Argentina, Afghanistan, Granada, Panama, Yugoslavia, Venezuela, Palestine, and Libya
...might have a few words to say about that.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 2d
Yeah, articles in the Western Press are far too often anchored in a presumption treated as beyond dispute that America are the good guys, something that's only true in the portrayals of American politicians, military, intelligence operatives and police officers in the films that America itself makes.
Dispute said presumption and suddenly American voters electing a president who treats Western First World nations a little closer (yet, still not as bad) to how American presidents have treated Developed and Developing nations in pretty much all continents of the World including Europe and Oceania (in the latter the small island states being the victims) isn't exactly a wild idea.
What the current American elected president is doing to Canada basically qualified as a "know unknown" before it actually happened - something like this was likely to happen, only the exactly when and with whom being the unknowns (I supposed a decade or so ago Mexico would seem more likely to be a victim of something like this than Canada)
Objection@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 1d
What Carney said about the myth of the international rules-based order is correct. There's always been winners and losers in that and what's happening now is that the US is trying to kick Canada and other countries out of the winners' circle.
The idealism of only dealing with "the good guys" has never been remotely realistic or feasible. But obviously trade is necessary for the global economy to function, so compromises will always have to be made. It's just that this idealistic illusion was maintained by sweeping US anti-democratic and destabilizing actions under the rug and pretending, as the article does, that they didn't even exist.
China does not, and likely never will get the same treatment, and frankly it's probably better to trade with a country with issues you're aware of and capable of acknowledging than one that you can pretend has no issues to feel better about trading and allying with them.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 1d
I think it's pretty clear by now that per the wishes of America's elites and even most of their electorate (who voted for somebody explicitly promising that) the only "winner" acceptable for America in an America-dominated World is America itself (which in practice means just a handful of people in America, since the common Americans aren't actually "winning" anything).
So any article framing the replacement of an American-led World order by a Chinese-led World order as being a bad thing is either ignorant as fuck or purposeful propaganda by one of the few Americans "winning" from the current setup or one of those foreigners getting some crumbs from it - i.e. somebody who makes money from being a "friend" to America and spreading the idea that American dominance is a great thing for everybody.
A fair article would be pretty neutral about it - pretty much "these other guys who don't give a shit about us are trading places" - with maybe even a "let's get this over with ASAP" slant since as the saying goes, "when the elephants fight it's the grass that suffers", and at this point the "grass" is pretty much all of us in countries other than the US and China as even Canada is now not in the inner circle with America.
thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe · 2 pts · 2d
Add Australia 1975
jerkface@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1d
Make it rhyme or I'm not reading it.
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 0 pts · 1d
Okay, now list every military adventure by a non-democracy in history.
Objection@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 1d
How exactly are the Pelopensian Wars at all relevant to anything?
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · -1 pts · 1d
If it has to be relevant, shorten that list to just this century. It'll be a lot less impressive, then. And still shorter than the list for non-democracies.
Objection@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
Seems like a pretty arbitrary cut-off. The US has been brazenly aggressive, colonial, and uninterested in protecting democracies for the whole time it's been around, it was never different from this and it never changed from its colonizer history.
It won't, actually. The vast majority of those are from this century. Is this your first time hearing about stuff like Operation Condor or something? You know, the whole project of subverting and assassinating left-wing politicians across all of South America and replacing them with far-right dictators?
Why would it need to be limited to non-democracies? The claim was not just that the US promotes democracy, but also stability. If the US destabilizes a region by overthrowing or assassinating the only person who was keeping things together, that's a valid example too.
Again, in the vast majority of cases we are talking about democracies, because the thing about democracies is that when the people are in control, they tend to not like letting the country be colonized and exploited, and the thing about the US is that it wants to colonize and exploit every country it possibly can.
With dictators, on the other hand, that's like one guy who you just have to bribe, and he'll keep the oil or whatever flowing because he's getting rich off it while the people suffer, and he knows they only reason they're not chopping his head off is because of the foreign power backing him up. It's no wonder the US loves destroying democracies and establishing dictatorships, because dictators understand that the spice must flow.
You know what, I have an idea. Since you have so many issues with my list, how about you make your own? List off all the countries the US has overthrown that 1) were not democratic, and 2) became democratic afterwards. That'll be the shortest list of all.
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · -1 pts · 1d
It's the 21st century right now... Like, that's generous. Even the early 'oughts are questionably relevant, since nobody would start a war over 9/11 now.
You could talk about the knock-on effects of whatever war, as well, but then you're right back to the Peloponnesian war mattering.
I'm probably just going to cut it off here, since you want to rage jerk, and my point has been made.
Objection@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
When I hear "this century" I assume you mean "the past 100 years." I didn't realize you meant the past 26 years, which is even more arbitrarily restrictive. There are still plenty of examples from that period, just as there would be if you arbitrarily limited the scope to a similar span of time anywhere in US history, because it's a consistent pattern of behavior.
Lmao, what?? What is this talking point supposed to be? We're literally still in the Middle East fighting "radical Islam." Not to mention that so-called "emergency measures" like the Patriot Act are still in place and will be for the foreseeable future.
No? My point is that the US is and has always been a destabilizing, anti-democratic, colonizing power. It's relavent to include historical examples that prove that it's a consistent pattern of behavior. If I just pointed out recent wars, then you'd probably try to pretend that it's just some recent trend, if I just pointed out less recent wars you'd say it'd changed since then. It's nonsense to arbitrarily limit which examples are allowed just because you don't like the facts.
No doubt you're ignoring recent examples like the Iran War because it's "just Trump," just as you've tried to exclude the Bush years which means really when we talk about "this century" we're talking about, what, the 12 years under Obama and Biden? Out of the entirity of US history! Even within the already arbitrary restriction of the past 26 years, you want to limit it further to less than half of that! That's so obviously cherry-picking. Not that the pattern of behavior was any different under either of them.
Meanwhile this talking point of "list every war by a non-democracy" is a complete non-sequitor, a "whataboutism" that has nothing to do with anything.
Also, many of the examples I mentioned from before the year 2000 are still very much relevant to the modern world in general, because they still affect who's in power today. The US doesn't have to coup a country again if they can just keep supporting the person or government they already installed. Most countries don't get the opportunity to transition their whole form of government within a time frame of 26 years. Even if the US had changed its behavior, which absolutely hasn't happened.
If you make up bullshit excuses to defend imperialism, expect to be called on it.
Lmao, what point would that be? That the US is less imperialistic than fucking ancient Rome? You haven't made any point whatsoever, just attempted, very badly, to invent excuses for imperialism and authoritarianism.
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · -1 pts · 1d
For what it's worth, I would absolutely include Iran and Venezuela, although it remains to be determined if that's by a democracy or not. Yes, probably the tail end of Afghanistan, as well.
Even Iraq has gone through a couple eras since Bush. Hawaii is just literally nothing like it was then, and neither is America.
TemplaerDude@sh.itjust.works · 14 pts · 2d
I don’t trust china but I trust the states even less right now. Pretty fucking wild thing to say but that’s where we’re at. Canada should be looking to diversify beyond those two but at the end of the day you have to trade where there is trade.
group_hug@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 1d
You don't trust a country run by somebody who bold face lies about easily verifiable truths hundreds of times every day? Who TACOs back and forth on ultimatums several times a week?
Who makes international trade agreements one year claiming them the best deal ever, then calls them terrible deals 4 years later and rips them up?
What is wrong with yo man? Are you sane?
betanumerus@lemmy.ca · 12 pts · 2d
While the rest of the world, Asia, Europe, Africa, Australia, South America, are switching to EVs, Canada and the US are fighting over who will build fossil cars. You can't make this up.
goodguys9@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 2d
To be fair, one of the big trade issues the US is mad about in the auto industry is Canada allowing Chinese EVs into their market. I feel like Canada is fighting for EVs (less so now with Carney), we just have a giant thorn stabbing us in the side.
betanumerus@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 2d
There is nothing wrong with Chinese EVs. The US should be going after cars that transmit information to foreign governments instead, which has nothing to do with electric propulsion. If it's about trying force Canadians into buying fossil fuels, screw them.
vinceman@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 1d
Oh, you mean like how all of the big 3 na domestics report to the foreign government to the south of my country?
betanumerus@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1d
You surely know more than i do about that.
TheBloodFarts@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1d
I can't friggen wait until byd begins selling in Canada
betanumerus@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1d
i don't care about the brand i just want fossil combustion off my streets and out my lungs
humanspiral@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1d
It is a minimal quota so far. Only expensive models because of quota. If US goal is to destroy Canadian auto industry, with trade surplus in favour of US, then a zero market access for US producers should be policy. Much better value from Chinese EVs. And extreme subsidies have been given to foreign automakers to develop in Canada. The low quota is incentive for foreign producers to invest in Canada as a lobby move to not raise the quota. It is not, yet, a move towards China mass EVs. Australia has adopted this strategy, and much better value cars that don't suck up tax subsidies is an obvious path to take.
SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca · 12 pts · 2d
This guy was a diplomat, but he doesn't understand triangular diplomacy?
Both the US and China suck balls. They're both authoritarian, both have dictators that abuse their power and the people of their countries have accept it because of fascist propaganda about how only a strongman can run the economy and foreigners are trying to screw them over.
The main difference is the distance to those countries. It would be nice if we didn't need to engage with either of these countries, but the US is right next to us so they can't be ignored. So we need to play both sides. Not on every single thing, we don't want to engage with China anymore than we have to, because their regime sucks in the same way the US regime sucks. But if they're willing to fill in any gaps caused by the trade issues with the US, then you gotta do what you gotta do.
DupaCycki@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 2d
How do 'former diplomats' come up with shit like this. Unless it was meant to be propaganda?
Of all the things you could criticize China for... this guy chooses to criticize it for the US acting like a drunk 14-year-old.
Well, I think I see why he lost his diplomat position.
avidamoeba@lemmy.ca · 9 pts · 2d
I was wondering if the pro-US propagandists are gonna be smart enough to stay silent this close to us hearing the layoffs rumbles at our workplaces but no. Dumb as bricks.
ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca · 8 pts · 2d
At least the rest of the world is realizing we're enemies now.
humanspiral@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 1d
This is pure demonic nazi Canadian establishment platformed propaganda for the purpose of enslaving and oppressing Canadians, and their minds, into the only permissible negotation alternative: Begging only the US for survival. Demonic propaganda of the last 20-75 years must frame your political allegiances. There is no direct US threat, and no future direct US threat, that should ever move you from ultimate devotion to overarching US demonic naziism. No participation by Canada in any future multipolar global order, but especially not permitting Canadians to reconsider nazi US/Israel supremacy as "Canadian values".
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1d
Canada can't move it's borders. They do business with the US because of proximity far more than policy.
And as the US is a globe-striding superpower with a centuries long reputation for bullying allies and enemies alike, that means making some hard choices.
Israel exists in it's current state precisely because American fascists sponsor it's worst residents for high office. Practically the definition of a kakocracy. If you're not an ultra-nationalist with a thirst for eugenics, you're not invited to the Knesset.
Of course, Canada has the same problem. It's Parliament is also stacked full of American aligned oligarchs and fascists, to the point where they gave one of the last living Nazis a standing ovation not three years ago.
Until you can purge yourself of fossil fuel plutocrats and evangelical white supremacists, I'm not sure how you decouple from the United States, much less the global petro-cartels.
humanspiral@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 1d
My core issue with OP is choices to help/protect Canada must be framed in the horror that it could also help China, and harm the bullying power of the master we can only be allowed to devote alignment to their maximum evil. Editorials like this, try to force the easy path of going through the stages of grief until accepting the extreme US demands/enslavement.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
Cutting off my own nose to spite China's face
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 7 pts · 2d
China is better than America because they're way less likely to interfere outside its own borders (yet still do it, hence all the shit in the South China Sea, plus lets not forget Taiwan) and when they do their impact on the rest of the World is much smaller.
That is however, for now.
If things carry on in the direction they seem to be going and China replaces the US as the World's foremost imperial power (the kind of things History shows us invariably happens and is even roughly on schedule), given enough time they'll be as bad as America is now.
As somebody else mentioned when quoting (I believe) a Canadian politician, middle powers should stick together. If you look at the EU, that's basically one of its purposes, which is probably why American Administrations of either color dislike it - it use to be much easier for America to push around European nations, even the mid-sized ones.
Witchfire@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
I guess the Canadian PM is, technically, a Canadian politician 😂
jerkface@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 1d
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detention_of_Michael_Spavor_and_Michael_Kovrig is a glaring counter example showing they don't have any particular issue with acting outside their own borders.
https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/trnsprnc/brfng-mtrls/prlmntry-bndrs/20240719/43-en.aspx is another alarming example of China intentionally undermining Canadian sovereignty.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_government_interference_in_Canada demonstrates that there is no democratic institution in Canada that China is not willing to attack. These are not allies. They are only talking to us because they know its a path to placing us in a more vulnerable position.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 1d
Next to just what's happening to Oil prices worldwide due to America's and Israel's attack on Iran, your single example of China's interference abroad (the second one, as your first example is not even that since it happened in China) are pretty much zero impact actions.
Even in a 100% Canada-centric perspective, just Trump's tariffs cause way, WAY, WAY more pain to Canadians in aggregate than two Canadians being unfairly arrested for almost 3 years in China, and China running "Foreign Police Stations" in Canada targeting Chinese Nationals living in Canada.
My point stands that "China is better than America", not because China is good but because America is horrible. Further, even whilst (until recently) America was treating Canada reasonably well, that doesn't mean they America wasn't a horrible nasty nation - they were just did inflicted the suffering on people in various countries amongst which was not Canada - just ask most people living in Latin American or the Middle East how nice America is.
My point also stands that when China does interfere abroad "their impact on the rest of the World is much smaller" than America's. I mean the immediate example of that is America's attack on Iran and what's happening to Oil prices Worldwide due to it, but well before that America was always (almost literally "always": if I remember it correctly the US was only ever not at war for 7 years in its entire History) attacking other countries and have left enormous piles of corpses in many of them. China did do some pretty fucked up shit abroad (most notably attacking and annexing Tibet), it's just that they haven't done in quite a while whilst America has done some of their nastiest things in the last 2 or 3 decades and have done a lot more of that and left a lot more people dead on their trail.
And, of course, your examples of China's abuses in Canada and against Canadians in China just reinforces my expectation that eventually China will be just as bad as America once it finds itself in a similar position.
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 2 pts · 1d
China pushes everyone in their region around massively and shamelessly, actually. Taiwan and the atolls gets Western headlines, but it doesn't stop there. The US has been a lot easier to live next to, until now.
Even if we pretend China's as big of a threat to Canada, though, that just means we should play them off each other.
Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 21h
All of Latin America would beg to differ
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 1 pts · 16h
How's Mexico been doing? Last I checked, China didn't exist the last time they had a major problem with the US, and in recent history they've voluntarily built their economy around trade with them, just like us.
If you go back to the Cold War, like you're statistically about to, well, China liked a good military intervention as well.
Now you do recent Chinese examples, because then you'll have to learn more about what China's been like to it's neighbors. Basically, think about the Meng Wanzhou period, but more and all the time.
Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 16h
Cuba and Puerto Rico say hello
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 1 pts · 15h
Puerto Rico is complicated, since a lot of people there are pretty glad to be able to move to America whenever. Cuba is a straight example, but one exception just proves the rule.
Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 15h
Complicated, say like, Taiwan
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 1 pts · 12h
In a completely different way, but yes.
If your point is that China is awesome, why?
castle88@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 20h
Yes, speaking of Canada specifically, China is less of a present and proximate threat. However, we still need to go into any agreements with eyes wide open.
DrStanleyGoodspeed@lemmy.zip · -2 pts · 1d
Dude China is so much worse. They are just really good at staying under the radar. Everything they do is with the underlying motivation to subvert the west.
It’s really the CCP that’s the villain. The Chinese people in and of themselves can be very decent. The CCP is like a wild animal really attempting to exert its dominance. Ruthless, unfeeling, and indifferent to suffering.
There are those among us that are pieces of shit sometimes too, but we are far better than the CCP. A world under CCP rule would be really and truly be like 1984. South Korea - North Korea, West Germany - East Germany, Warsaw pact Poland - Democratic Poland. The juxtaposition is very telling.
We have to find a way to get along. The Canadians need to accept they are dealing with Trump. I’m sorry, but that’s the dude for two more years. Just placate him and find a way to kick the can down the road that postpones when any additional tariff or trade barrier would come into effect. It will provide time for the courts to have a shot at blocking them. Just keep playing games with him by delaying them, and try to wait him out. Keep in mind most of us don’t like the tariffs either.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 7 pts · 1d
Mate, all dictatorships are shit.
No need for Red Scare bollocks - just look at Pinochet in Chile or Putin in Russia which are at the opposite end of the Left-Right political spectrum and you'll see similar shit as the CCP. Hell, just look at what's increasingly happening in America and you see them pretty much moving at speed towards that kind of shit.
That however has no relevance on my point that America is nastier for people outside of America in general than China is, if only because America has invaded way more countries and killed way more people than China has and the repercussions of America's action's abroad for rest of the World tend to be larger (just look at the current gas prices at the pump if you have any doubts of that, or go read the History of how ISIS was born in American prisons in Iraq).
It just so happened that through most of that time Canada wasn't a target of American nastiness so it didn't look like that to Canadians who didn't give a shit about the rest of the World, but rather it was mainly directed against South American and Middle Eastern nations.
humanspiral@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 1d
Providing abundance is humanism. It will always beat an oligarchy enforcing scarcity, economically. The dementia that abundance for their people and world, and profits that come from helping world is "to subvert the west" is pure oligarchist BS lies meant for dumb people to hope their patriotic oligarchists love them as much as the ads and politicians claim they love them.
jerkface@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1d
Oh, we're definitely waiting him out. There's no reason to play along with him while we do that, though. We'll just hold our breath until the stink clears.
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 0 pts · 1d
I mean, the CCP is itself not a monolith. It's an institution, that shifts and evolves like institutions tend to.
Totalitarianism can happen, and they're way closer to it than we are, but, I dunno, evil is banal. Going that far into the villain narrative just helps obscure the real situation.
nyan@lemmy.cafe · 7 pts · 1d
China is not reliable, but it is somewhat predictable, which the US, currently, is not. (Even assuming that the US government will do the stupidest thing possible in this or any other timeline won't help you with the details, because stupidity is infinite and unfathomable.) This makes China easier to deal with. I don't think Carney is dumb enough to mistake "easier to deal with" for genuine goodwill, though, because my cat is smart enough not to make that mistake. I'm tired of seeing these articles that presuppose the government is too oblivious to know that China is dangerous and has to be handled like a lit stick of dynamite tied to a venemous snake.
DrStanleyGoodspeed@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 1d
Yup this plays right into our adversary’s arms. This type of diplomacy is impossible to defend. Really renaming Lake Ontario?! Wtf man. What are you doing??? This is not helping America or you for that matter. Unnecessary self-inflicted wound.
BillyTheKid2@lemmy.ca · 10 pts · 1d
I don't think he cares about helping America
DrStanleyGoodspeed@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 1d
I don’t know what to think about him man. There are times when I think he is trying to help, but then there are times when it seems like he is enabling our adversaries and diminishing the country.
BillyTheKid2@lemmy.ca · 5 pts · 1d
Here's a trick: if you want to know what a politician is really doing, stop listening to anything they say and watch what they do.
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 2 pts · 1d
Trying to help America and doing it well are two different things, which probably explains some of that.
Edit: And while it seems he is a genuine American ultranationalist (maybe he likes the grandeur of the national myth), it's probably down the priority list from his more personal objectives.
Witchfire@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Quite the opposite in fact, I think he's hell bent on ransacking it and leaving it in ruins as his last action on Earth
BillyTheKid2@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1d
Honestly he isn't that important. I know it looks that way, but he's really just a pawn. A useful one who can take the blame. Classic mob behavior.
BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 1d
Yup, he's a symptom of the rot, not the cause of it. Ignorance, stupidity, narcissism, incompetence, and extreme patriotism led to a significant portion of the USA being content that way.
BillyTheKid2@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1d
And it has momentum, not easily reversed. We're living in interesting times...
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1d
A pawn that made it all the way to the other side of the board, sure.
He's way too rich and connected to be dismissed as some corporate foot soldier. "The President isn't really in charge" is a conspiracy theory line that ignores the broad scope and enormous budget of an given administration.
Trump's not doing anything in office that isn't entirely in his own personal (very short term) interest. He's inflated his own personal fortune far beyond what even the Cheneys or the Bushs dreamed of.
thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe · 6 pts · 2d
I think the Prime Minister who called out that middle-powers needed to stick together if they are to survive is probably aware that jumping out of the fry pan into the fire isn't a good idea. Conversely the Chinese are no worse than the Americans, so Canada all the middle powers need to deal carefully with the 2 superpowers, keep them as much at arms-length as possible, and try to make win-win deals. Something China currently does and the US doesn't while the orangatun is in power.
k0e3@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 2d
Yeah, no. The happiest dictator is the one from the US.
Geobloke@aussie.zone · 4 pts · 2d
China aren't reliable, look at what they did to Australia after our prime minister, rightly or wrongly, called for an investigation into the origins of covid
For the record, I don't think Scotty did the right thing, but China's response wasn't justified either
thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe · 7 pts · 2d
I think China had a very long list of data points of what happens if you allow a Murdoch mouthpiece to mouth off without slapping back hard and executed according to what precedent dictated.
He deserved the response for being SloMo, his entire existence warranted a slapping.
Note, I may be a little biased in this analysis as I wouldn't piss on him if he were on fire
Geobloke@aussie.zone · 2 pts · 1d
I'm not quite as biased as you, but he probably should have been more diplomatic (see also hose holding.) Still wouldn't vote for him or his ilk for all the housing gains in the world
QueenHawlSera@piefed.social · 4 pts · 2d
I'm rooting for Canada
TribblesBestFriend@startrek.website · 3 pts · 2d
As I post somewhere else Charles Burton have … hmmm how to put it … weird credentials.
I’m in his side for this op ed however … but it seems written by AI so much it don’t go in anything serious
Scotty@scribe.disroot.org · -6 pts · 2d
I don't think it's written by AI, and it makes valid points in my opinion.
TribblesBestFriend@startrek.website · 6 pts · 2d
Oh Yeah that are valid points. Shifting the Canadian economy out of the American tentacles will be hard and the easiest path forward is, sadly, the Chinese and it will be hard at first on our collective wallets, hopefully it’ll gets better but I doubt it
Now all this point are already known, why an ex-ambassador and specialist on the question (since is writing for a think thank) doesn’t have more insight, something more crunchy to say ? This is here that I feel there’s something afoot
Scotty@scribe.disroot.org · -5 pts · 2d
Canada must seek closer ties with like-minded democracies (what it does already). The 'Chinese path' is - at best - a short-term convenience, but in the long run a lost game for Canadians and the free world in general. Beijing and other dictatorial regimes aren't reliable partners, no matter what happens in the U.S.
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 2d
Please don't believe everything you've learned from main stream media.
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · -1 pts · 2d
I'm surprised the results aren't 120%.
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 2d
Guess who conducted the study?
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · -2 pts · 2d
A marketing firm, looks like.
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works · -2 pts · 2d
"My country is democratic"
Remind me, when was the last time the ruling party lost an election in China?
mrdown@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2d
Is a two party system any better where both side shame others from not voting to their favourite political cult? Aren't those who people advocating for a one party system?
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works · -2 pts · 2d
Doesn't matter. I'm talking about China. The US having a shitty democracy does not do anything to legitimize China's lack of democracy.
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 2d
They lifted 800 million people out of poverty in 40 years. 90% of Chinese adults own their home.
Why would they lose an election?
Scotty@scribe.disroot.org · -3 pts · 2d
This is the same cheap propaganda that is so widespread here. China is a dictatorship where people can't openly say their opinion about democracy nor anything else, at least not if the opinion differs from the Communist Party's narrative. And Beijing's human rights violations have been evident for decades.
Edit:
I remembered a study I read some time ago and could now find it. It's from 2024, and it essentially says that when Chinese citizens are surveyed anonymously, support for party and government plummets:
This is just one among many studies that show that 'perception' of democracy isn't that simple to illustrate just by something like a diagram as propagandists make it seem. It should be clear that directly asking citizens who live under a dictatorial regime what they think about their government will provide no useful answers in my opinion.
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 2d
Cheap propaganda produced by Harvard University? Try harder, lol.
Edit: Got this graph mixed up with a Harvard study that also shows satisfaction with China's gov't.
jerkface@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1d
Like it would be the first time Harvard was involved in shitty propaganda?
mrdown@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2d
Which democracy?
TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1d
Funny how the base that Trump has shown constant admiration for is also reaping the maximum enjoyment and benefit from this.
OrteilGenou@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
Starting to feel like that's the point
minorkeys@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 1d
Dictators love conflict because it's the antithesis of alliances, which they are incapable of having, and its also their biggest weakness.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
Dictators rely heavily on alliances, as they often lack the domestic support necessary to govern independently.
The Banana Republics of Latin America, the Middle Eastern monarchies / oligarchies, and the East Asian military juntas have all required extensive outside aid from wealthy colonial powers to hang on.
When a dictatorship loses foreign sponsorship - such as the Batista Regime in Cuba or the Mubarak 30-year long "Presidency" in Egypt or the Assad government in Syria - they can collapse rapidly if they don't secure new sponsorship.
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 1 pts · 12h
There's a problem with that idea: who, then, was sponsoring the USSR?
Assad relied on Russia for military goods. North Korea depends on China for what little trade they have. When it comes to domestic support, though, "managing" that is a dictatorship's whole job; nobody can do it for them.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2h
During WW2, it was the Americans, as a hedge against their colonial rivals in Germany.
The US also initially backed the Castro Revolution in Cuba, in order to rein in Batista's Peronist style dictatorship.
And the US backed the Vietnamese and Chinese Communists against the Japanese.
Foreign alliances are critical for all of these movements to take off, just as they are critical for domestic dictatorships to stay in power.
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org · 1 pts · just now
I don't think anyone supported the reds during the revolution, and after WWII, obviously the Soviets were head of their own sphere. During WWII they were correctly identified as an ally against the Nazis, but it's hardly fair to extend that to the whole Soviet period.
Plus, if you go back a bit further in time, there were no democracies to sponsor anyone. And there were regimes, like Easter Island, that were totally isolated from the rest of the planet but still existed.
Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 21h
Slight correction on the Assad government because it was a family that held power for well over 30 years by playing both super power sides (sort of a middle man role) rather than having single sponsorship.
The civil war definitely was a result of grievances and want for regime change but was also heavily supported by the US (Hillary Clinton's emails even have detailed plans of what would unfold if civil war broke out, and things happened exactly that way). The US wanted regime change because of Syria's alignment with Iran and Hezbollah (and therefore a threat to US and Israel).
Because of US involvement and support given to the revolutionary forces, Bashar then requested support from Russia and we know where that ended.
bedwyr@piefed.ca · 0 pts · 2d
Yeah well half of those dictators personally picked on canada in the prez' first term through now. Because canada is weak without the US and the US now has abandoned canada.
mojo_raisin@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 1d
It's like 99% of our problems are caused by these fictitious entities called states asserting their perceived entitlements to rule over lands and people and compete with other states.
If your cat or dog can't see it or experience it, it's not real.
Business = cat can't see it, isn't real
Money = can't see it or pieces of paper
state = can't see it, isn't real
borders = can't see it, isn't real
law = can't see it, itsn't real, some point at paper with marks on it as proof
POTUS = big smelly orange man
SCOTUS = old people in robes
house = big shelter with food
apartment = shelter with food
Store = bigger shelter with more food
2003 Toyota Corolla = shelter that moves
Lamborghini = shelter that moves
gender = can't see it, isn't real
sports = play
Real Things
tree = tree
food = food
suffering = suffering
consent = consent
love = love
home = home
family = family
community = community
sex = sex
violence = violence
defense = defense
nyan@lemmy.cafe · 2 pts · 1d
I think you mean, "horrible torture device that eats cats". Or so several of mine have informed me over the years. Unless there's something I'm not aware of that might cause them to discriminate between 2003 Corollas and all other vehicles.
TheBloodFarts@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1d
Dog what are you trying to convey exactly