Didn't even really need a scanner. I realized it when I started reading it in the voice style of an AI YouTube video.
comments
comment on
SPECIAL REPORT - Your Neighbour Canada Has Changed And You're Not Going to Like What is Happening
comment on
SPECIAL REPORT - Your Neighbour Canada Has Changed And You're Not Going to Like What is Happening
Not sure why you’re getting the down votes but the scanners are pretty confident that this is AI written
OP- let’s not post slop, even if it agrees with our opinion. It doesn’t have any emotion and its bias will always be hidden from us. Do better.
comment on
SPECIAL REPORT - Your Neighbour Canada Has Changed And You're Not Going to Like What is Happening
Written by AI
comment on
SPECIAL REPORT - Your Neighbour Canada Has Changed And You're Not Going to Like What is Happening
The article is targetting an American audience, but it is interesting to read this perspective
Article Text
It is not just the attack on Venezuela, breaches of the United Nations’ Charter, or the use of illegal force that still somehow left a dictatorship in place.
It is not just the threats to annex Greenland or to make Canada the 51st state — both of which would violate the territorial integrity of sovereign states protected under international law.
It’s not just the admiration that U.S. President Donald Trump has for Russia’s Vladimir Putin or Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, both in the process of illegally annexing territory.
And it’s not just the sanctions issued against Canadian officials at the International Criminal Court (ICC) or defunding the UN.
America is engaged in a full-frontal, multi-pronged attack on what still exists of the international rules-based order and its institutions — and we are just one year into Trump’s second four-year term.
Yet, the Liberal government of Prime Minister Mark Carney appears incapable of calling out U.S. violations of international law.
On Venezuela, Carney tried desperately to avoid condemning the illegal attacks, stating that “Canada calls on all parties to respect international law.” That stance is (hopefully) true every day, and so offers little during a concrete geopolitical crisis.
When asked about whether American strikes on suspected Venezuelan drug traffickers were legal (they aren’t), Foreign Minister Anita Anand said that it was “within the purview of U.S. authorities to make that determination.” In other words, Anand believes violators of international law get to decide if they violated international law.
Such logic is not only wrong, but dangerous. It sets precedents for further breaches of international law — not only by autocrats like Putin in Ukraine and ICC suspects like Netanyahu in Palestine — but by China in Taiwan as well as America in Greenland and, yes, even Canada.
As Canada’s former ambassador to the UN, Bob Rae, says: “I don’t think they’re musings … The fickle finger of fate can point to us just as surely as it can point to Denmark or anywhere else.”
Now, some might argue that the Canadian government should pull its punches. It is facing a belligerent administration willing to incarcerate hundreds of Canadian citizens in ICE detention centres and impose punishing tariffs on Canadians.
Ottawa also hasn’t secured a trade deal with Washington, and the last time a Canadian politician — Ontario Premier Doug Ford — irked Trump, the Washington kiboshed progress toward a renewed trade partnership and tariff relief.
Perhaps, then, former Liberal adviser Brian Clow is right in insisting that on contexts like Venezuela, “there’s not much use hyperventilating about it or lecturing the United States. Canada has one main goal with the United States in the coming year: It’s to navigate the USMCA review and resolve the current tariffs. We’ve got to keep our eye on that ball.”
Such views prioritize the Liberal government’s particular notion of pragmatic politics over principled action. But at what cost? Does Canada have a red line? If so, what does Trump have to do for the Canadian government to find its spine, let alone its elbows?
The idea that Canada can secure a reasonable trade deal without robust protection of international law is preposterous.
As a middle power, Canada benefits tremendously from the protections afforded by international law, including in the areas of trade and finance. The international rule of law is also what allows us to instinctively understand that acts of aggression and annexation aren’t just wrong, but illegal.
Canada’s reputation as a country historically engaged in promoting respect for international law and resolving international conflicts is perhaps its most important calling card on the world stage. To those beyond our borders, it is part of the lore, the image, and very idea of what Canada is.
The Trump administration today poses the gravest threat to international law of any U.S. government in history, not only because of what it does but because of the lawlessness it permits in contexts like Ukraine and Palestine. There is a cost.
Every precedent and institution that is weakened puts more people and states at peril. The idea that somehow Canada can pull its punches forever and somehow be spared is delusional.
Canada must find it within itself — along with other states — to defend international law. It can do so with its traditional European allies, and also with South American and African states, among others, who have been the most clear-eyed about defending international law and institutions from Trump’s attacks.
As Rae notes, “In our own self-interest, we have to work with other countries to do everything we can to stop the United States.” Doing so would help diversify Canada’s pool of close allies and perhaps even trading partners.
The famous poem by pastor Martin Niemöller following the Second World War and The Holocaust imparts the wisdom that when perpetrators come for others, yet we remain silent, there will eventually be no one left to speak out when they come for us.
Ottawa has remained silent as Trump attacked the ICC and the UN, remained mealy-mouthed on the unlawful attacks on Venezuela, and cannot bring itself to unequivocally denounce Washington’s obsession with annexing other states’ territory. If that silence continues, who will stand up for us if Washington puts our own country in its crosshairs?
Conflating capitalism or nationalism with human nature is a typical display of internalization of naturalised settler-colonial rationalities. "Greed" is a conveniently vague explanation for someone who cannot or will not imagine a world without this system.
Canada is a settler colony. Its only purpose is to facilitate the extraction of resources within its borders to the greatest effect under capitalist imperatives of infinite growth and profit maximization. When I say it isn't a nation, that isn't because I think nationalism is any real way to imagine human organizing, I say it because Canadians cling to an idea of national identity to justify what is fundamentally a brutal, inhuman system.
Hint: If you want to know about a subject, go learn about it before you assume that you've been born with exceptional knowledge on it.
And I disagree with you. I think Canada leans more towards being a country than being a textbook slogan or a phrase, even though it soaks up a lot of american culture. Look beyond nationalism and towards capitalism (and human nature) for the real culprit. Hint: Human nature is global and greed is a big thing.
Wow, lotta liberal distortions here, but yes there's a reason that those two rhetorical approaches work. Canadians are white supremacist and only turn on US imperialism when they can see it as a threat to their own white identity. Most are also politically illiterate to the point that the common interest of capital is effectively obscured by whatever superficial crisis there is about Canadian sovereignty.
Also, Ford does not win from votes, he wins from the voting system. Ontario Cons consistently win elections with a minority vote with low voter turnout. White suburbanites and rural voters correctly identify that their immediate material wealth is dependent on the maintenance of a hierarchal system, and they do not care about how short term that way of life is so long as they have it until they die. So, their votes are weighted highly because they are the most likely to support capital while urban voters are forced to fight Liberals and Cons to just get a welfare liberal NDP MPP.
No, it really isn't. Canada is a neoliberal stronghold and exists more as an extractive enterprise than any discernable nation. Canadian settlers support Trump except when he is explicitly threatening them instead of implicitly. The reality is that Canada, as in settlers, is more culturally compatible with US fascism than it is challenging.
he chickens out when he is confronted.
I guess you slept through the bombing, kidnap and invasion of Venzuela. He's now declared himself President of Venezuela.
All this "elbows out" bullshit is 100% keyboard warriors who are clueless about how intertwined the two economies are.
Doug Ford can do the stupid stunts for Sun readers, but away from the cameras he has let US interests buy out a significant portion of the Ontario economy. We forget like goldfish in 2018 he was "MAGA" and "A Republican" in his own public words. So now his brand is "elbows out" and Ontario hick simps keep voting for him.
To be fair, Canada is trying it's best to wriggle out from that "complicit" dependency. At least that is what the Canadian media is indicating.
Sounds awesome. What are we going to do when the Canadian state inevitably sides with capital, American or otherwise, and uses its resources to commit violence against us?
Donald Trump is not the start or end of US imperialism, that is a system the Canadian state is not only complicit in, but dependent on.
Stand up to him because like all bullies he chickens out when he is confronted. Cowering is exactly what he wants.
Why is this the only article that discusses Carney and Venezuela?
Answer to my own question, political white noise.
comment on
Opinion: We need to prepare for the possibility that the U.S. uses military coercion against Canada
Hi, it is me, Poland, in 1936. Nothing bad will happen. Just focus on the cost of living and ignore what's happening next door.
comment on
Opinion: We need to prepare for the possibility that the U.S. uses military coercion against Canada
Is no one in Alberta being educated about WWII and Hitler?
You think Alberta doesn't think Hitler was cool?
comment on
Opinion: We need to prepare for the possibility that the U.S. uses military coercion against Canada
Yay, let's waste more billions on the CAF and drain social programs so we can become like the US while avoiding becoming the US.
The problem with these right wing rags is that they never state what they mean, nor explain how to fund it. What they mean is spend hundreds of billions on war toys made abroad from tax revenues and cuts from all other programs. These assholes never suggest a military tax.
comment on
Opinion: We need to prepare for the possibility that the U.S. uses military coercion against Canada
Canada also needs to prepare for the reality that they can no longer depend on the US for strategic defense in the long term either.
That has been fairly obvious for the past 11 months.
comment on
Opinion: We need to prepare for the possibility that the U.S. uses military coercion against Canada
Actually, Alberta is a HUGE traitor bitch. I say we force-feed those hicks some history. WWII. Their grandfathers fought and died here, and in Europe fighting Hitler.
comment on
Opinion: We need to prepare for the possibility that the U.S. uses military coercion against Canada
Is no one in Alberta being educated about WWII and Hitler? JFC. We are watching Trump following Hitler’s playbook. Europe is banding together over Greenland. USA sucks
comment on
Opinion: We need to prepare for the possibility that the U.S. uses military coercion against Canada
That's the first woman president of Southern Canada...that's the Canada that has Tijuana in it.
comment on
Opinion: We need to prepare for the possibility that the U.S. uses military coercion against Canada
Yeah, that's a major downside. That said, the threat is real. Probably more an economic one than military, but nevertheless they are capable of forcing us to give them our resources to extract and exploit our labour to line their oligarchs' pockets. So I think it's good to acknowledge the threat but we need to respond with strengthening our economy, production capacity, self-reliance, and most of all - our social cohesion via getting more of what we produce into the hands of the workers that produce it. Chances are our government won't be going in that direction since it's not profitable for their largest donors, but we have to work to force them to.
E: When I say stronger economy I don't mean what Carney's doing, trampling the environment and people to line oligarchic pockets. I mean an economy that benefits working people much more than what we have now. Directly via higher wages, indirectly by producing more domestic goods, providing quality universal care and so on.
comment on
Opinion: We need to prepare for the possibility that the U.S. uses military coercion against Canada
Is it? So far all I've seen from these US threats is our government use them to pass bills that increase and quicken resource extraction, bypassing environmental protections and alike.
5% increase in military spending with no new tax increases, just reductions in civil service sizes.
They're basically using this to frighten us into giving our oligarchs everything they've wanted.
view more:
next ›