this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2025

140 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

10430 readers

768 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Related Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.

🏒 Sports

Hockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Toronto Blue Jays

Basketball

Toronto Raptors

Soccer

Main: /c/CanadaSoccer
Toronto FC

💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.

💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales

🗣️ Politics

General:
- Canada Politics
- FairVote Canada
Federal Parties (alphabetical):
- Animal Protection Party of Canada
- NDP
By Province (alphabetical):
- BC Greens

🍁 Social / Culture

Rules

Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

140

This Is Not the Time to Make Nice (charlieangus.substack.com)

submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by streetfestival@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca

37 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Does anyone think for a second that a man [(Trump)] who brags about attacking his own citizens will let Canada off with a gentleman's trade agreement?

The rhetoric from Washington is escalating. FBI director Kash Patel accused us of flooding the United States with terrorists. Homeland Security director Kristi Noem says our border represents a threat to American safety. Now Attorney General Pam Bondi is accusing Canada of creating a crisis in human trafficking.

These are orchestrated outbursts of falsehood to demonize Canada. This is the part of the fascist playbook. The stakes are frighteningly high so I understand the PM's desire to tread carefully. But there are areas where we can't cede ground. If we do, the fascists will take it. That is how they operate.

What keeps me up at night are the words of Louis Fischer, a journalist who documented the Nazi rise to power. He wrote that Hitler's opponents couldn't comprehend the real nature of the Nazi threat. As reasonable and democratic people, they made the mistake of believing that they could negotiate with Hitler. Or they thought that they were wiser than Nazi street thugs. They reassured themselves that Hitler was "just being Hitler."

And so, they willingly ceded ground, believing it was a strategy to bring the Nazis into the democratic fold or outwit them. In ceding ground, they fell into the abyss.

This is what concerns me about the Roberts' invitation. It signals either naivety or desperation. If Roberts was the one who blew off the meeting, it's because he didn't need to take the measure of the new government. The invitation alone gave him all he needed to know.

In writing this, I feel the need to state that I am rooting for Prime Minister Carney. Everyone knows that I am not a Liberal. I never will be. But he won the election by offering himself as a wartime prime minister.

We need him to be that war time prime minister now.

top 37 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] AlexLost@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

He made an agreement with us in his last term that he's thrown out the window. He's a two bit conman and a double dealer. He'd turn his own crank anytime he feels like it, why bother making any deal.

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I am trying to argue with the G20 meeting taking place at Trump’s resort so I have been sending emails places. This is the reply I have most recently received from my do nothing MP:

In my opinion, it doesn’t matter where the G20 is held. The point is that the host country picks their location based primarily on security issues. The location is entirely their choice.

Our country currently relies and will continue to rely heavily on the United States for our economic success. Our priority must be to retain access to our largest trading partner not arguing about whose house to meet at.

[–] definitemaybe@lemmy.ca 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I mean... What are Canadian MPs supposed to do about US corruption? It's up to them to figure it out. It's the host country's choice where to host it; if the US administration chooses to line their own pockets, it's up to US legislators/courts to hold them to account.

Or am I missing something?

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 3 points 22 hours ago

I am trying to get Canada to make a move to boycott it and to get the other members to do the same and then to host an alternative in Canada.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 0 points 6 hours ago

I'm Canadian. While I agree with my country about Trumps US aggression and trade war theatrics, I always disliked the phrase "elbows up!".

[+] melsaskca@lemmy.ca -8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Charlie Angus is a Meidas guy now? I'm now sick of seeing him all over the place since he joined Meidas. Meidas beats dead horses for clicks and revenue, desensitizing us with their constant bombardment. I like both of their messages but sheesh!

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Listen, as much as I do find Ben Meiselas and MTN very sensationalized and it's hard for me to listen to them for long periods of time, I do think Mr. Angus is right to team up with them and lead the Canadian branch of Meidas.

The fact that you see him annoyingly often means that some Canadians that were completely unaware of the resistance movement will come across it and consider it.

Of course, we can all have our little gatherings on how the world should really be, in Gastown, Kensington Market or Le Plateau but without reach it is very difficult to be a nationally coordinated social movement.

When Fox News and corporate billionaire backed media dominate the airwaves and stories, the message that resistance is possible is easy to cover up, if the speakers of it aren't coordinated. To illustrate, Ben Meiselas got an interview with California Governor Newsom. So did Charlie Kirk (may he rest in piss). Without some functional equivalent of a left-wing Fox News, right-wing propaganda is going to take all the airtime.

[+] threeonefour@piefed.ca -20 points 2 days ago (3 children)

This article doesn't contain a point. What does the author want the government to do?

[–] dom@lemmy.ca 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Not cede ground. Seemed pretty clear.

Outright call out falsehoods. Say when they are lying.

[+] threeonefour@piefed.ca -11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What do you mean by "not cede ground"?

[–] dom@lemmy.ca 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I already explained this.

Outright call out falsehoods. Say when they are lying.

Do you want me to explain what that means?

[+] threeonefour@piefed.ca -18 points 2 days ago (2 children)

So just fact check? The Canadian government should fact check the US government?

[–] TheTetrapod@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Wow, I always kind of thought the "just asking questions" thing was overblown, but your obtuseness is impressive.

[–] Krudler@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

You haven't answered a fucking thing to be honest. You're clearly hostile.

Your explanations written in crayon with backwards letters: no cede ground! Call out!

[+] threeonefour@piefed.ca -9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I still haven't received an answer of what people want the government to do. Fact checking is something the government can do but I don't see that being what people are asking for.

[–] Krudler@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

You're talking to a hostile ignoramus, I'm reading the thread, and you've done nothing wrong here, the other person is just a jerk.

[–] threeonefour@piefed.ca 2 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

I appreciate it, though being hostile back won't change anything. Being mass downvoted, insulted, and called a troll for asking what actions people expect from the Prime Minister has led me to the conclusion that this isn't a place for discussion.

[–] Krudler@lemmy.world 1 points 16 minutes ago

It 100% is not and I can confirm that with my own experience.

This place is filled with irrational trolls who are operating in an emotional fear framework, no rational discussion has taken place.

[–] dom@lemmy.ca 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

At a minimum, yes.

Are you sure you're smart enough to be having these conversations?

[–] threeonefour@piefed.ca -3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I just didn't see what point the author was trying to make. What did they mean by saying Carney needs to be a "war time prime minister"? I see now that he meant Carney needs to fact check more.

[–] KanadrAllegria@lemmy.ca 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

PM Carney ran (and won) on a platform of not giving in to Trump's manipulative tactics, of keeping Canada strong and independent, of protecting Canada's best interests. Now the author (Charlie Angus, btw) is asking him to keep those promises, to be the strong prime minister he said he would be, and not back down from what he said he would do.

Hope that helps.

[–] KanadrAllegria@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I see a point;

This is the story of fascism. And you either stand up to fascists . . . or you will end up in the cages yourself. In the case of Canada, our options are either resistance or accommodation.

. . . The risks of antagonizing Trump are clear, but so are the risks of trying to accommodate the profoundly anti-democratic and thinly-veiled violence of a gangster regime.

. . .

We need [Carney] to be that war time prime minister now.

. . .

. . . The PM needs to bring his case to the people and tap into their determination to hold our ground. We need to show men like Kevin Roberts that the Canadian people and government are not going to be worn down.

The PM used the term “elbows up” in the election - Canadians are not willing to put them down now.

(Emphasis mine)

To summarize: do not accommodate. Resist.

Seems pretty clear to me.

[+] threeonefour@piefed.ca -12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Resist what?

[–] dom@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Lies and attacks on sovereignty

[+] threeonefour@piefed.ca -8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Has the government not been doing that?

[–] grey_maniac@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Are you a bot, or literally that obtuse?

[+] threeonefour@piefed.ca -8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'm that obtuse apparently. As far as I know every Canadian politician has denounced Trumps 51st state rhetoric. Is there something I'm missing?

[–] KanadrAllegria@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There's a lot more than just the 51st rhetoric, and not all Canadian politicians have been proving they have a backbone.

See: Danielle Smith, Scott Moe, Pierre Pollievre, and Andrew Scheer, among others.

[–] threeonefour@piefed.ca -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Should Carney be included in that list? Genuine question. I wouldn't put him in the same league as the others but, from the article and the way people are commenting, it seems like people would disagree.

[–] KanadrAllegria@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think that's basically what this article boils down to. We haven't seen as much of Carney's backbone as we'd like, and for a lot of people he probably is on the list of politicians who have disappointed their constituents. Not as bad as some, yes, but still not holding up his end of the bargain as well as people had hoped. Hence this article, where Charlie Angus is asking that the government resist not accommodate, and keep the elbows up.

You asked in another comment what Carney can do to prove he's a strong PM... There are myriad ways, but what it comes down to is not letting Trump or his minions walk all over him, nor control the narrative. As the article says it's risky to push back, but it's also risky to be too passive. Carney will probably have to find the line and walk it as best he can, as he promised the Canadian people he would.

Anyway, I feel like our discussion has gone full circle at this point, and I'm not sure what else I can add to make anything clearer.

[–] threeonefour@piefed.ca 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I appreciate your reply! I felt like I was going crazy with everyone insulting me for some reason. I'm not sure what I did wrong. Maybe there was a better way to phrase my questions? Maybe it's just the nature of all political discussion now?

I was just curious about what people actually what Carney to do. People say he needs to do better but they won't say what that entails. Perhaps they can't say because they don't actually know. They just feel like he needs to do better.

I get the sense that people want Carney to be a showman like Trump. That he should ratio Trump on Twitter with some sick comeback and yell into a camera once in a while instead of always being boring and diplomatic. While that might make some Canadians happy, I'm not sure how it would help. I wouldn't say Trump's way of diplomacy has won the US any favours. Their cities are begging for tourists, their companies are begging for customers, and their politicians are begging to not be shot. Do we really want to emulate their leader? Does a strong man need to yell?

[–] KanadrAllegria@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I, for one, do not want to see Carney yell, shout, or otherwise match Trump's vibe. I am sick of Trump's performativeness (is that a word?) and think Carney's calm collected demeanor is a breath of fresh air compared to him.

What I do want is to see the results we were promised... Strengthening our economy, and making Canada less dependent on the US for example. And it's very likely that it's happening already, we just haven't seen the results yet. But there are also other "side quests" the government seems to be working on which don't lead to those results, and that's frustrating as well.

Perhaps they can't say because they don't actually know. They just feel like he needs to do better.

I think this is a valid assessment. For myself, I'm not particularly political, so a lot of this is new to me, but I do feel like things need to be better, I just don't specifically know how they should be done.

I think your original comment came across a little trolley, which is why you got the response you did. Sometimes It's hard to tell a genuine question from someone who is just trying to get a reaction.

[–] threeonefour@piefed.ca 2 points 1 day ago

For myself, I'm not particularly political, so a lot of this is new to me, but I do feel like things need to be better, I just don't specifically know how they should be done.

Now that is a breath of fresh air!

[–] leastaction@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 days ago

I mean, read the article.

[–] BussyGyatt@feddit.org 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Enthymeme