“I expect Ottawa will quietly fold shortly after the vote to ensure that ongoing relations with the US remain functional”.
Fold how? Accept whatever nonsense he dictates? The tariffs, the Great Lakes, annexation? How do relations remain functional when you are dealing with a five year old? We will try but we will not be disrespected, neither by him, nor his fluffers or you.
Ian is simply being realistic. Sometimes the truth hurts.
Carney will roll over and play dead faster than you can imagine. (In Britain, we are more familiar with him than are most Canadians.) Sadly no Canadian leader will have the necessary heft or leverage to counter Trump—not even close. Life is frequently unfair.
(Edit: I’ve also responded at slightly greater length elsewhere on this thread.)
Thanks. I asked him to explain what he meant by fold. I gave him some options. Besides being insulting he was also vague. Since we are the purported foldees, it would be helpful to know what that means. Maybe you have an idea perched as you are.
I don’t believe that Ian meant anything there to be insulting. (If someone armed with a butter knife capitulates at gunpoint, is it shameful cowardice or laudable pragmatism?)
So folding if I understand you, is to accept whatever the demand happens to be, whether they are tariffs, territory or sovereignty itself. Just capitulate and put that butter knife down and no one will get hurt. Is that the pragmatism you mean?
Yes, that is precisely what I mean. You have understood me perfectly. You have not misrepresented my position any more than you misrepresented Ian’s. Brilliant, good show!
If you simply want to have smoke blown up your backside and hear your every opinion slavishly echoed back to you, there are plenty of other places for that kind of thing. You seem like a certain sort of newsreader who enjoys reading analyses - but only insofar as you hear what you wish to hear. Ian pointed out reality, and you attack him for it? Eminently reasonable that is not.
Agreed, the most thoughtless thing Bremmer has written and he has had a few. I guess in his mind, we Canadians have no pride and will allow annexation, resulting in our country to be raped with no voting voice to satisfy some rapacious people in his country. No.
Thank you for pointing this out - I had to read and reread that Bremner paragraph a number of times asking myself what he expects the outcome to be if Canada were to indeed fold as he so assuredly expects.
Ian, I’d very much think your Canadian readers would like to hear what you mean by fold and what the expected outcome would be in your mind, if it is complete capitulation. I normally find your writing measured and thoughtful, this seemed flippant and thoughtless and tossed out in the ether without further expanded thought. Please do better.
As an economist and former professor specialising in international trade, I concur wholeheartedly with Ian. I presume he seemed so matter of fact (or “flippant”) because this *is* a matter of fact: neither Canada nor Mexico have anything remotely approaching the necessary hegemonic clout to counterpunch Trump. It is unfortunate, but wishing it were different will not make it so, nor will the most fervent patriotic bromides or performative boycotts.
I don’t always agree with Ian by any means, but among my peers here (in Britain, and therefore at some objective distance), Ian’s view is solidly representative of a broad consensus. Clearly, Trump’s advisors have informed him of this as well, which is why he can afford to sustain such aggressive tariffs. The massive power imbalance gives him immense leverage, as his neighbours have far more to lose economically than he does. This is not up for debate: the trade numbers speak for themselves, I’m sincerely sorry to say.
It’s one thing to say there’s a massive power imbalance, that’s patently obvious. It’s also perfectly fine to say that the US can wreak enormous economic havoc on Canada - that’s also a given. Nobody is arguing this.
However, it’s an entirely different thing to say that this will automatically lead to quick capitulation after the Canadian federal election. That is opinion, not fact, and it happens to have no basis in reality. It also assumes that Canada has no agency and will simply fold like a house of cards and that neither the political class nor citizens have any backbone or willingness to endure in order to remain sovereign. To which I say, please have more respect for Canadian national identity. Assuming that outcome is fact is odd and presumptuous, particularly coming from a former professor who should know better than to call a future possibility a “fact”.
I think you’ll learn that Canadians are most definitely more Churchill and less Chamberlain than you presume.
Happy to revisit this conversation in a year and see whether Canada has capitulated with the speed and lack of fight you and Ian assume we lack.
My thoughts exactly. We have been told by the president that he wants to crush our economy so that we will have no choice but to become the 51st state. Annexation will mean submitting ourselves to the harrowing and chaotic changes being implemented in the U.S. by the new government. « Quietly fold shortly after the vote »? I think not.
“I expect Ottawa will quietly fold shortly after the vote to ensure that ongoing relations with the US remain functional”.
Fold how? Accept whatever nonsense he dictates? The tariffs, the Great Lakes, annexation? How do relations remain functional when you are dealing with a five year old? We will try but we will not be disrespected, neither by him, nor his fluffers or you.
Ian is simply being realistic. Sometimes the truth hurts.
Carney will roll over and play dead faster than you can imagine. (In Britain, we are more familiar with him than are most Canadians.) Sadly no Canadian leader will have the necessary heft or leverage to counter Trump—not even close. Life is frequently unfair.
(Edit: I’ve also responded at slightly greater length elsewhere on this thread.)
Thanks. I asked him to explain what he meant by fold. I gave him some options. Besides being insulting he was also vague. Since we are the purported foldees, it would be helpful to know what that means. Maybe you have an idea perched as you are.
I don’t believe that Ian meant anything there to be insulting. (If someone armed with a butter knife capitulates at gunpoint, is it shameful cowardice or laudable pragmatism?)
So folding if I understand you, is to accept whatever the demand happens to be, whether they are tariffs, territory or sovereignty itself. Just capitulate and put that butter knife down and no one will get hurt. Is that the pragmatism you mean?
Yes, that is precisely what I mean. You have understood me perfectly. You have not misrepresented my position any more than you misrepresented Ian’s. Brilliant, good show!
If you simply want to have smoke blown up your backside and hear your every opinion slavishly echoed back to you, there are plenty of other places for that kind of thing. You seem like a certain sort of newsreader who enjoys reading analyses - but only insofar as you hear what you wish to hear. Ian pointed out reality, and you attack him for it? Eminently reasonable that is not.
This is plainly not a “safe space” for you.
There’s a lot of coping and denial going on here.
It is really cringe.
lol
So you won’t answer either. What kind of nonsense is this?
🇨🇦thank you for this forceful reply which I will echo. Not so fast please. 😤
Agreed, the most thoughtless thing Bremmer has written and he has had a few. I guess in his mind, we Canadians have no pride and will allow annexation, resulting in our country to be raped with no voting voice to satisfy some rapacious people in his country. No.
Thank you for pointing this out - I had to read and reread that Bremner paragraph a number of times asking myself what he expects the outcome to be if Canada were to indeed fold as he so assuredly expects.
Ian, I’d very much think your Canadian readers would like to hear what you mean by fold and what the expected outcome would be in your mind, if it is complete capitulation. I normally find your writing measured and thoughtful, this seemed flippant and thoughtless and tossed out in the ether without further expanded thought. Please do better.
As an economist and former professor specialising in international trade, I concur wholeheartedly with Ian. I presume he seemed so matter of fact (or “flippant”) because this *is* a matter of fact: neither Canada nor Mexico have anything remotely approaching the necessary hegemonic clout to counterpunch Trump. It is unfortunate, but wishing it were different will not make it so, nor will the most fervent patriotic bromides or performative boycotts.
I don’t always agree with Ian by any means, but among my peers here (in Britain, and therefore at some objective distance), Ian’s view is solidly representative of a broad consensus. Clearly, Trump’s advisors have informed him of this as well, which is why he can afford to sustain such aggressive tariffs. The massive power imbalance gives him immense leverage, as his neighbours have far more to lose economically than he does. This is not up for debate: the trade numbers speak for themselves, I’m sincerely sorry to say.
It’s one thing to say there’s a massive power imbalance, that’s patently obvious. It’s also perfectly fine to say that the US can wreak enormous economic havoc on Canada - that’s also a given. Nobody is arguing this.
However, it’s an entirely different thing to say that this will automatically lead to quick capitulation after the Canadian federal election. That is opinion, not fact, and it happens to have no basis in reality. It also assumes that Canada has no agency and will simply fold like a house of cards and that neither the political class nor citizens have any backbone or willingness to endure in order to remain sovereign. To which I say, please have more respect for Canadian national identity. Assuming that outcome is fact is odd and presumptuous, particularly coming from a former professor who should know better than to call a future possibility a “fact”.
I think you’ll learn that Canadians are most definitely more Churchill and less Chamberlain than you presume.
Happy to revisit this conversation in a year and see whether Canada has capitulated with the speed and lack of fight you and Ian assume we lack.
Until then, Elbows Up.
Thank you.
My thoughts exactly. We have been told by the president that he wants to crush our economy so that we will have no choice but to become the 51st state. Annexation will mean submitting ourselves to the harrowing and chaotic changes being implemented in the U.S. by the new government. « Quietly fold shortly after the vote »? I think not.
RESIST THE ORANGE TIRANT!
Brilliant title. 👍
Trump will quietly fold in Q3.
He is destroying and destabilizing the world order. This will not end well.
America Only.