Trump enjoyed having Trudeau as a foil. The Canadian uproar on X was bizarre, but the foreign media probably covers Trump as noxiously as our own MSM. Did they really think we'd take them by force? We'd become like Canada or worse--California--not the other way 'round.
“Edmonton is a major-league city, best known in the U.S. as the place where Wayne Gretzky set all those ice hockey records in the 1980s“
On April 6, 2025, Alex Ovechkin broke Wayne Gretsky’s all time record for most goals scored in a career. Alex plays not for Edmonton, but for Washington.
In the 20th century the consensus was that Gretzky is the all time greatest, hence his moniker “the great one”. In the 20th century he is the one. Hence the reason why Alex passing is all time record of career goals scored is a big deal in the NHL.
Sports lends to great arguments. Who was greater, Mays or DiMaggio or Aaron or Mantle? It doesn't really matter. In hockey, who was the greatest? Gretzky? Howe? Richard? Ovechkin? Orr? It doesn't really matter. I would say that Orr was excellent on both ends of the ice, more so than Gretzky, Howe. Richard or Ovechkin.
“Who was greater, Mays or DiMaggio or Aaron or Mantle?”
Uh, Babe Ruth. PERIOD
One way to tell who the greatest is/are to have played their individual sport, is: did they transcend the sport by becoming bigger, greater than the sport itself? Also, were they a household name so that even non-fans of their specific sport knew who they were, and could reasonably state what they did in their sport?
For those reasons, the fact remains: among all 20th century MLB players, there’s Babe Ruth, and then there’s everyone else. (The examples you named never came close to matching Ruth’s dominance over the sport itself, and many non-fans couldn’t then, much less now, recall who they were or what they did in MLB.
“ It doesn't really matter”
Of course it does, to millions of rabid fans throughout the decades. NOTE: in the 2020’s which specific player is Ohtani being constantly compared to? Only one specific player, and he retired in 1935.
“I would say that Orr was excellent on both ends of the ice, more so than Gretzky”
You also forgot messier, and Lemieux, by the way—and they too have their supporters for making the all time greatest NHL list.
Well, unlike Orr, Gretzky had the advantage of having transcended his sport so much so that he became bigger then the NHL itself (in the early part of his career). The fact that his record that was recently broken is all over the sports world, and that other great scorers are constantly compared to Gretzky tells one all they need to know.
As Steve likes to follow Occam’s razor (or butter knife), in both these two specific cases, MLB & NHL the consensus is near universal as to which player is the greatest ever to have played their respective sports.
In recent generations, the U.S. and Canada have thrived by being vaguely friendly without interfering too much in each other’s business.
Unfortunately, Trudeau the younger loved using his position as Prime Minister to involve himself in American politics. He could not resist commenting American failings, using US school shootings as reason for more gun control (we have few mass shootings of our own) and very publically opening our borders to refugees on Twitter to contrast with Trump expelling Haitians.
A lot of left wing Canadian nationalism is just a form of this sort of stupid on upmanshipt.
Agreed, divisive white Christian nationalists should take their beef up with divisive Islamic folks who clearly announced their intent to dominate the planet with the caliphate and have it out and finalize the crusades and quit hating on the Jews.
The Canada Greenland shit show diversion deflection distraction is baffling as it was never brought up as an election point and I got a notice of new tax on my cell phone yet spam calls are 10 times worse, the Trump tax on my telephone ticked me off
I've not investigated beyond this notice yesterday
I looked at my water bill and 20% of it was county fees for light rail I don't use I don't use the sports ball stadium either that the sports ball owners are collecting sports ball money for everything's broken
I pay $25 a month for a recycling bin that is not on my property nor do I use
It's all under the fees collected for the five county Metro council, unelected unaccountable and over budget but new phone taxes for extra spam calls
Trudeau’s downfall is a good example of how the Twitter age of politics has real world payback. As you say, Trudeau sought to become a player in American politics, if only by virtue-signalling as the good leader to the north (if only he could be in charge!). Thus when Trump returned to office he had no problem trampling on diplomatic niceties to finish Justin off. In contrast Britain’s Keir Starmer has similar politics to Trudeau but Trump seems to have no problem with him because Starmer hasn’t made it personal on Twitter.
The 70s song "American Woman" by The Guess Who was a Canadian diatribe against their neighbor to the south. "I Don't Need Your War Machines, I Don't Need Your Ghetto Scenes" drips with anti-American hatred.
As much as I am severely critical of the way Trump has handled American relations with our friends in Canada, if Canada chooses to elect a Liberal government I hope Trump lays the hammer to Canada and humiliates the Canadian government. The Liberals of Canada are evil incarnate.
Unfortunately, the alternatives to evil incarnate are not much better.
The NDP (left of the Liberals) and Greens are everything you wouldn't like about the Liberals but worse. Both are doing badly in the polls. Occasionally there is talk of them merging. They are at least sincere, while the Liberals are made up of people who enter politics because they want to be in govt (the Liberals usually win and are called The Natural Governing Party).
The Conservatives (Tories) are the most likely alternative. Similar to anyone but Trump Republicans. They have said very little about immigration which has caused a housing crisis. Controlled by corporate elites, their solution seems to be selling off govt assets for housing. This would make our cities even more crowded and dysfunctional.
They tend to be pro Indian while the Liberals are pro Chinese.
The Bloc Quebecois are generally sensible about immigration, but only run in Quebec ridings and are indifferent to what happens outside Quebec.
The People's Party are the only ones who have seriously proposed cutting back on immigration nationally to around 100 000 a year (this would be 850 000 if adjusted for US population). They would also give priority to groups such as the Yezdis and Middle East Christians as refugees. They are a break away party from the Conservatives. But, they are hard core, loony libertarians and poll at about the same level as the Greens, 3% when things are going well for them and they don't have a single seat in parliament.
The NDP might get wiped out as their weaker voters are flooding to the Liberals. I occasionally listen to Eric Grenier on the Internet and he thinks the NDP might drop to 4 seats. Below 12 seats and the NDP won't be recognized as a political party in Parliament, right?
Sorry to go on so much Derek, but I have another comment to make about this.
Humiliating the Canadian govt would be counter-productive. Referring to the Prime Minister as State Governor, saying that we produce nothing that the US needs, suggesting that we should become the 51st state just makes Canadians more Anti American and more likely to support the Liberals.
A better move would be to let the American public know how badly our immigration policy has worked and use it as an argument for reducing legal immigration to the States. Show what it has done to housing prices, GDP per capita and how our politics are now influenced by China and make it clear that "We don't want to be like Canada" would make the Liberals a lot more uncomfortable.
I think Trump's handling of Canada has been one blunder after the other in just three months into the Trump presidency. The harm he's done won't be resolved until 2029 at the earliest.
I am answering both of your points in one to avoid taking too much space on the thread.
-Yes, the NDP may lose their official party status, but this does not mean that they are finished as a party. There have been wild swings in their share of the vote from election to election, they have been down to 9 seats but a few years ago were the official opposition. They can count on loyal core supporters who will always be willing to canvas for them. They are doing badly now as many who would vote for them normally are now going to vote LIberal because of Trump.
-I agree with you. Trump's handing of Canada has been bad. The Tories would not be exactly pro Trump, but they are not looking for ways to undermine him the way the Liberals are. For the alt right though Canada is probably a lost cause for a long time to come. More important is the effect of Trump on the European alt right (see https://erickaufmann.substack.com/p/trumps-foreign-policy-is-weakening)
Yes, but that was superceded by essential planetism after the end of the cold war. Like planetism out of love, instead of planetism out of fear of nukes. What we now have is however, abandonment of planetism altogether...
This US-Canadian alignment only functioned during WW1 and WW2. Now, big parts of the former British Commenwealth are hostile to nationalist US interests, and that hostility includes Canada. That Canada (and EU) liked Obama and Biden was simply a reflection that Obama and Biden administrations didn't represent nationalist US interests.
Norm’s view of nationalism was formed while playing football for one of Quebec’s few Anglophone schools, when the conscientious and historically-minded Francophone students would take it upon themselves to demonstrate to him practically how the Battle of the Plains of Abraham ought to have ended.
Canada and the US have been having these little spats between each other on and off since the Revolution. There was a long suspension of them during the Cold War but now it seems we're back to the prewar norm.
The real issue here is Canada's self-destruction through population replacement and economic submission to China. Hopefully Trump's pressure will snap them out of this and they'll start acting like proper Canadians again.
"The real issue here is Canada's self-destruction through population replacement and economic submission to China."
The U.S., Canada, etc. did not win WWII. The Globalists did. They've been controlling their $ and running those countries ever since, making their "self-destruction" just destruction, by the destroyers, ie; the hostile elite, not China. China is just their latest scapegoat, their foreign scapegoat, that is. Their domestic scapegoat in all of the West is, of course, White Man Bad.
After all, it was the hostile elite who exported the U.S. economy to places like China and India, while also importing them through HB-1 visas, or letting them pour over the borders illegally, "legally", whatever. So, unfortunately (or not, it's hard to tell) there is not a chance in the world that "they'll start acting like proper Canadians again", or Americans, or, etc, etc.
Put bluntly, the hostile elite have done their dirty work and are scrambling amidst the ruins of their destruction, while everyone else either looks on, or simply ignores it all (perhaps wisely).
I'm a bit more optimistic. I think we can replace our hostile elite with a better one, and we have the opportunity for national and civilizational renewal.
As for China, they've been doing this from the beginning. China has always had a tributary system and they're simply trying to reestablish it.
Maybe this can work with some of their near abroad, but we won't be a part of it.
I read a couple things recently that opined that one of the things Trump was trying to do with talk about Canada and Greenland was expose the hypocrisy of the globalists. If borders don't matter, why all the pearl clutching about Canada and Greenland? I think they have a point.
Trump like Lord Copper stands for strong, mutually antagonistic governments at home and abroad. Thus he gets along great with obstreperous foreign leaders like Putin, Kim Jong Un and AMLO whom others find irritating.
But I get the sense a sunny ways-type leader like Justin Trudeau or Claudia Sheinbaum being ushered in for a meeting with Trump is a bit like George Constanza going into into George Steinbrenner’s office in “Seinfeld”…
Because Trump proposed it? If Trump came out for a United Nations army or money transfers from the First World to the Third World, the Global left would oppose both just because Trump proposed it. They're so predictable.
"A fundamental problem with nationalism is that it tends to pit natural nationalists against each other in stupid spats, when they’d be better off forming loose coalitions against globalists."
And not just nationalists. As Steve has been, well, noticing for a long time now, and getting his readers to notice as well, the coalition of the fringes holds itself together, barely, using the crazy glue of anti-white hate. As things are now I wouldn't be at all surprised if at some point down the road the coalitions of both the nationalists and the fringes mobilize (can't exactly use the word "unite") long enough to have a go at the globalists. Stranger things have happened in history. Surely the globalists know that much. So, what could they do to keep this from happening?
Well, Steve tells us in the fourth paragraph. Loosen the leash of your paid proxy and let him "free associate." Of course, "free associate" has to be put in quotes, since that is not what is really happening. After all, the hostile elite has not come this far to let a mere President run things. No way!
Trump single-handedly created a Liberal landslide in the Canadian elections first by humiliating the very unpopular Justin Trudeau which eventually forced him to resign, making childish insults like calling Canada a potential 51st state, and finally dropping the tariff bomb as the elections were just beginning. I voted for Trump and have no regrets for voting for him, but sometimes he's a total buffoon. On Christmas Day 2024, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre was probably salivating at the idea of having the next Christmas in the Prime Minister's residence at the head of a mighty Conservative majority. But today he may as well try and catch the wind.
A nation is a people, not a state, so nationalism isn’t defined by borders, ironically. The Quebecois are a nation, inside and outside of Quebec Province, within the Canadian state, and probably beyond its borders. There are Quebecois in northern Vermont and New York state
The US (and the world) would be so much better off with a Conservative government in Canada. Trump is letting his dislike of Bebe Trudeau and his ego undermine his own interests and the country's prospects. Again.
Gonna say, this isn't really "the fundamental problem with nationalism" it is the fundamental problem with Trump.
The actual "problem with nationalism" is the problem of "where the borders go"--or conversely getting the population to match the borders. You have these cases where for some historical reason there's an intermixed population--e.g. Northern Ireland, Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, the mess in Israel--or you have semi-bogus pan-national state--e.g. Belgium. But most of the time it's fairly clear where the borders belong--"nope those people over there aren't us"--and people of goodwill can work it out. (E.g. Czech/Slovak divorce was pretty tractable and amicable.)
This is actually far, far, far superior to imperialism where there really isn't *any* natural constraint on the borders other than raw power, As history demonstrates imperialism generates conflict without end.
The problem with Trump is that he basically is a real-estate imperialist. He's spend his career acquiring and building. He's not a maintenance guy, success is seeing some new hotel or casino or luxury apartment spring into existence at his whim. Coupled with his narcissism, really "winning" and leaving his mark would be making the USA not "better for Americans", but "bigger"--changing the map.
I think that is key to understanding Trump's character: NYC real estate developer. I've personally known two wealthy New York City WASP businessmen, and they are both cut from the same Trump/Steinbrenner cloth (Germanics, but that's getting a bit hair splitting). My hypothesis is it's from having to go head to head with Jewish, Greek and Italian businessmen. If you watched the Rankin Smith family genteely oversee the Atlanta Falcons for decades, you'd appreciate the contrast. Not surprisingly, WASPs like the Rankin Smiths hate WASPs like the Trumps/Steinbrenners. Smith also couldn't stand brash Texas WASP Jerry Jones when he showed up at the NFL country club.
A small point, I think norm/your impression of Trudeau Sr. reminds me of how people are starting to look at the Austrian Painter. A mystique that is generally false and needs to die.
While you wrote him as the great combiner of Canada, he will be known in half the country by the Salmon Arm Salute.
Trump enjoyed having Trudeau as a foil. The Canadian uproar on X was bizarre, but the foreign media probably covers Trump as noxiously as our own MSM. Did they really think we'd take them by force? We'd become like Canada or worse--California--not the other way 'round.
“Edmonton is a major-league city, best known in the U.S. as the place where Wayne Gretzky set all those ice hockey records in the 1980s“
On April 6, 2025, Alex Ovechkin broke Wayne Gretsky’s all time record for most goals scored in a career. Alex plays not for Edmonton, but for Washington.
And Bobby Orr was greater than either.
In the 20th century the consensus was that Gretzky is the all time greatest, hence his moniker “the great one”. In the 20th century he is the one. Hence the reason why Alex passing is all time record of career goals scored is a big deal in the NHL.
Gordie Howe is up there with Orr.
Sports lends to great arguments. Who was greater, Mays or DiMaggio or Aaron or Mantle? It doesn't really matter. In hockey, who was the greatest? Gretzky? Howe? Richard? Ovechkin? Orr? It doesn't really matter. I would say that Orr was excellent on both ends of the ice, more so than Gretzky, Howe. Richard or Ovechkin.
“Who was greater, Mays or DiMaggio or Aaron or Mantle?”
Uh, Babe Ruth. PERIOD
One way to tell who the greatest is/are to have played their individual sport, is: did they transcend the sport by becoming bigger, greater than the sport itself? Also, were they a household name so that even non-fans of their specific sport knew who they were, and could reasonably state what they did in their sport?
For those reasons, the fact remains: among all 20th century MLB players, there’s Babe Ruth, and then there’s everyone else. (The examples you named never came close to matching Ruth’s dominance over the sport itself, and many non-fans couldn’t then, much less now, recall who they were or what they did in MLB.
“ It doesn't really matter”
Of course it does, to millions of rabid fans throughout the decades. NOTE: in the 2020’s which specific player is Ohtani being constantly compared to? Only one specific player, and he retired in 1935.
“I would say that Orr was excellent on both ends of the ice, more so than Gretzky”
You also forgot messier, and Lemieux, by the way—and they too have their supporters for making the all time greatest NHL list.
Well, unlike Orr, Gretzky had the advantage of having transcended his sport so much so that he became bigger then the NHL itself (in the early part of his career). The fact that his record that was recently broken is all over the sports world, and that other great scorers are constantly compared to Gretzky tells one all they need to know.
As Steve likes to follow Occam’s razor (or butter knife), in both these two specific cases, MLB & NHL the consensus is near universal as to which player is the greatest ever to have played their respective sports.
You say that
In recent generations, the U.S. and Canada have thrived by being vaguely friendly without interfering too much in each other’s business.
Unfortunately, Trudeau the younger loved using his position as Prime Minister to involve himself in American politics. He could not resist commenting American failings, using US school shootings as reason for more gun control (we have few mass shootings of our own) and very publically opening our borders to refugees on Twitter to contrast with Trump expelling Haitians.
A lot of left wing Canadian nationalism is just a form of this sort of stupid on upmanshipt.
Agreed, divisive white Christian nationalists should take their beef up with divisive Islamic folks who clearly announced their intent to dominate the planet with the caliphate and have it out and finalize the crusades and quit hating on the Jews.
The Canada Greenland shit show diversion deflection distraction is baffling as it was never brought up as an election point and I got a notice of new tax on my cell phone yet spam calls are 10 times worse, the Trump tax on my telephone ticked me off
What's this new tax? I was under the impression Trump so far had zero legislative achievements this term.
I've not investigated beyond this notice yesterday
I looked at my water bill and 20% of it was county fees for light rail I don't use I don't use the sports ball stadium either that the sports ball owners are collecting sports ball money for everything's broken
I pay $25 a month for a recycling bin that is not on my property nor do I use
It's all under the fees collected for the five county Metro council, unelected unaccountable and over budget but new phone taxes for extra spam calls
This dude don't abide
Death and Taxes (and Gordon Gekko stock tips)
Trudeau’s downfall is a good example of how the Twitter age of politics has real world payback. As you say, Trudeau sought to become a player in American politics, if only by virtue-signalling as the good leader to the north (if only he could be in charge!). Thus when Trump returned to office he had no problem trampling on diplomatic niceties to finish Justin off. In contrast Britain’s Keir Starmer has similar politics to Trudeau but Trump seems to have no problem with him because Starmer hasn’t made it personal on Twitter.
True. On Twitter, Trump gets to unleash his inner child.
Not sure of this. Trump has been equally bad for the Danes, who seem to have behaved with much more restraint than Trudeau during Trump's first term.
The 70s song "American Woman" by The Guess Who was a Canadian diatribe against their neighbor to the south. "I Don't Need Your War Machines, I Don't Need Your Ghetto Scenes" drips with anti-American hatred.
Clearly for Americans, revenge is dish best served cold
As much as I am severely critical of the way Trump has handled American relations with our friends in Canada, if Canada chooses to elect a Liberal government I hope Trump lays the hammer to Canada and humiliates the Canadian government. The Liberals of Canada are evil incarnate.
Unfortunately, the alternatives to evil incarnate are not much better.
The NDP (left of the Liberals) and Greens are everything you wouldn't like about the Liberals but worse. Both are doing badly in the polls. Occasionally there is talk of them merging. They are at least sincere, while the Liberals are made up of people who enter politics because they want to be in govt (the Liberals usually win and are called The Natural Governing Party).
The Conservatives (Tories) are the most likely alternative. Similar to anyone but Trump Republicans. They have said very little about immigration which has caused a housing crisis. Controlled by corporate elites, their solution seems to be selling off govt assets for housing. This would make our cities even more crowded and dysfunctional.
They tend to be pro Indian while the Liberals are pro Chinese.
The Bloc Quebecois are generally sensible about immigration, but only run in Quebec ridings and are indifferent to what happens outside Quebec.
The People's Party are the only ones who have seriously proposed cutting back on immigration nationally to around 100 000 a year (this would be 850 000 if adjusted for US population). They would also give priority to groups such as the Yezdis and Middle East Christians as refugees. They are a break away party from the Conservatives. But, they are hard core, loony libertarians and poll at about the same level as the Greens, 3% when things are going well for them and they don't have a single seat in parliament.
The NDP might get wiped out as their weaker voters are flooding to the Liberals. I occasionally listen to Eric Grenier on the Internet and he thinks the NDP might drop to 4 seats. Below 12 seats and the NDP won't be recognized as a political party in Parliament, right?
Sorry to go on so much Derek, but I have another comment to make about this.
Humiliating the Canadian govt would be counter-productive. Referring to the Prime Minister as State Governor, saying that we produce nothing that the US needs, suggesting that we should become the 51st state just makes Canadians more Anti American and more likely to support the Liberals.
A better move would be to let the American public know how badly our immigration policy has worked and use it as an argument for reducing legal immigration to the States. Show what it has done to housing prices, GDP per capita and how our politics are now influenced by China and make it clear that "We don't want to be like Canada" would make the Liberals a lot more uncomfortable.
I think Trump's handling of Canada has been one blunder after the other in just three months into the Trump presidency. The harm he's done won't be resolved until 2029 at the earliest.
Derek,
I am answering both of your points in one to avoid taking too much space on the thread.
-Yes, the NDP may lose their official party status, but this does not mean that they are finished as a party. There have been wild swings in their share of the vote from election to election, they have been down to 9 seats but a few years ago were the official opposition. They can count on loyal core supporters who will always be willing to canvas for them. They are doing badly now as many who would vote for them normally are now going to vote LIberal because of Trump.
-I agree with you. Trump's handing of Canada has been bad. The Tories would not be exactly pro Trump, but they are not looking for ways to undermine him the way the Liberals are. For the alt right though Canada is probably a lost cause for a long time to come. More important is the effect of Trump on the European alt right (see https://erickaufmann.substack.com/p/trumps-foreign-policy-is-weakening)
All the best, sorry for the long answer.
In the second half of the 20th century there was a push for planetism out of fear that anything less would eventually lead to nuclear war.
Yes, but that was superceded by essential planetism after the end of the cold war. Like planetism out of love, instead of planetism out of fear of nukes. What we now have is however, abandonment of planetism altogether...
This US-Canadian alignment only functioned during WW1 and WW2. Now, big parts of the former British Commenwealth are hostile to nationalist US interests, and that hostility includes Canada. That Canada (and EU) liked Obama and Biden was simply a reflection that Obama and Biden administrations didn't represent nationalist US interests.
Norm’s view of nationalism was formed while playing football for one of Quebec’s few Anglophone schools, when the conscientious and historically-minded Francophone students would take it upon themselves to demonstrate to him practically how the Battle of the Plains of Abraham ought to have ended.
Canada and the US have been having these little spats between each other on and off since the Revolution. There was a long suspension of them during the Cold War but now it seems we're back to the prewar norm.
The real issue here is Canada's self-destruction through population replacement and economic submission to China. Hopefully Trump's pressure will snap them out of this and they'll start acting like proper Canadians again.
"The real issue here is Canada's self-destruction through population replacement and economic submission to China."
The U.S., Canada, etc. did not win WWII. The Globalists did. They've been controlling their $ and running those countries ever since, making their "self-destruction" just destruction, by the destroyers, ie; the hostile elite, not China. China is just their latest scapegoat, their foreign scapegoat, that is. Their domestic scapegoat in all of the West is, of course, White Man Bad.
After all, it was the hostile elite who exported the U.S. economy to places like China and India, while also importing them through HB-1 visas, or letting them pour over the borders illegally, "legally", whatever. So, unfortunately (or not, it's hard to tell) there is not a chance in the world that "they'll start acting like proper Canadians again", or Americans, or, etc, etc.
Put bluntly, the hostile elite have done their dirty work and are scrambling amidst the ruins of their destruction, while everyone else either looks on, or simply ignores it all (perhaps wisely).
I'm a bit more optimistic. I think we can replace our hostile elite with a better one, and we have the opportunity for national and civilizational renewal.
As for China, they've been doing this from the beginning. China has always had a tributary system and they're simply trying to reestablish it.
Maybe this can work with some of their near abroad, but we won't be a part of it.
Thanks for your response Bill.
"I think we can replace our hostile elite with a better one, and we have the opportunity for national and civilizational renewal."
You don't know how much I want you to be right and me to be wrong. Seriously.
However it turns out, working for the best requires preparing for the worst.
I guess we'll see - and sooner than later.
No matter what we're facing I try to maintain a sense of optimism -- I've got young kids and want them to have hope
"I've got young kids and want them to have hope."
Absolutely! In the end, they are what it's all about.
I read a couple things recently that opined that one of the things Trump was trying to do with talk about Canada and Greenland was expose the hypocrisy of the globalists. If borders don't matter, why all the pearl clutching about Canada and Greenland? I think they have a point.
I would love to believe that. But....
It doesn’t matter if that was Trump’s intent or not, it was the result
Trump like Lord Copper stands for strong, mutually antagonistic governments at home and abroad. Thus he gets along great with obstreperous foreign leaders like Putin, Kim Jong Un and AMLO whom others find irritating.
But I get the sense a sunny ways-type leader like Justin Trudeau or Claudia Sheinbaum being ushered in for a meeting with Trump is a bit like George Constanza going into into George Steinbrenner’s office in “Seinfeld”…
Great calzone, the best, most beautiful. Here, try some, no no, try some.
Dear Diary, TIL about Lord Copper!
Because Trump proposed it? If Trump came out for a United Nations army or money transfers from the First World to the Third World, the Global left would oppose both just because Trump proposed it. They're so predictable.
The opening line is spot on and well put.
"A fundamental problem with nationalism is that it tends to pit natural nationalists against each other in stupid spats, when they’d be better off forming loose coalitions against globalists."
And not just nationalists. As Steve has been, well, noticing for a long time now, and getting his readers to notice as well, the coalition of the fringes holds itself together, barely, using the crazy glue of anti-white hate. As things are now I wouldn't be at all surprised if at some point down the road the coalitions of both the nationalists and the fringes mobilize (can't exactly use the word "unite") long enough to have a go at the globalists. Stranger things have happened in history. Surely the globalists know that much. So, what could they do to keep this from happening?
Well, Steve tells us in the fourth paragraph. Loosen the leash of your paid proxy and let him "free associate." Of course, "free associate" has to be put in quotes, since that is not what is really happening. After all, the hostile elite has not come this far to let a mere President run things. No way!
Good point. A "loose coalition of nationalists against globalists" is basically a coalition of the fringes on a global scale.
Trump single-handedly created a Liberal landslide in the Canadian elections first by humiliating the very unpopular Justin Trudeau which eventually forced him to resign, making childish insults like calling Canada a potential 51st state, and finally dropping the tariff bomb as the elections were just beginning. I voted for Trump and have no regrets for voting for him, but sometimes he's a total buffoon. On Christmas Day 2024, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre was probably salivating at the idea of having the next Christmas in the Prime Minister's residence at the head of a mighty Conservative majority. But today he may as well try and catch the wind.
Trump seriously messed up with his feud with Bebe Trudeau.
Unfortunately, there's no mulligans in politics.
A nation is a people, not a state, so nationalism isn’t defined by borders, ironically. The Quebecois are a nation, inside and outside of Quebec Province, within the Canadian state, and probably beyond its borders. There are Quebecois in northern Vermont and New York state
Plenty of them in Rhode Island. My brother was unfortunate enough to marry one.
Interesting. A good friend of mine did the same, with unpleasant consequences.
I just got word that my brother's ex had married for the third time at age 60. She's somebody else's problem now.
What right did Canada have to annex Juno Beach?
This sort of thing is the zest of life for Mr. Trump, from appearances.
The US (and the world) would be so much better off with a Conservative government in Canada. Trump is letting his dislike of Bebe Trudeau and his ego undermine his own interests and the country's prospects. Again.
Gonna say, this isn't really "the fundamental problem with nationalism" it is the fundamental problem with Trump.
The actual "problem with nationalism" is the problem of "where the borders go"--or conversely getting the population to match the borders. You have these cases where for some historical reason there's an intermixed population--e.g. Northern Ireland, Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, the mess in Israel--or you have semi-bogus pan-national state--e.g. Belgium. But most of the time it's fairly clear where the borders belong--"nope those people over there aren't us"--and people of goodwill can work it out. (E.g. Czech/Slovak divorce was pretty tractable and amicable.)
This is actually far, far, far superior to imperialism where there really isn't *any* natural constraint on the borders other than raw power, As history demonstrates imperialism generates conflict without end.
The problem with Trump is that he basically is a real-estate imperialist. He's spend his career acquiring and building. He's not a maintenance guy, success is seeing some new hotel or casino or luxury apartment spring into existence at his whim. Coupled with his narcissism, really "winning" and leaving his mark would be making the USA not "better for Americans", but "bigger"--changing the map.
I think that is key to understanding Trump's character: NYC real estate developer. I've personally known two wealthy New York City WASP businessmen, and they are both cut from the same Trump/Steinbrenner cloth (Germanics, but that's getting a bit hair splitting). My hypothesis is it's from having to go head to head with Jewish, Greek and Italian businessmen. If you watched the Rankin Smith family genteely oversee the Atlanta Falcons for decades, you'd appreciate the contrast. Not surprisingly, WASPs like the Rankin Smiths hate WASPs like the Trumps/Steinbrenners. Smith also couldn't stand brash Texas WASP Jerry Jones when he showed up at the NFL country club.
A small point, I think norm/your impression of Trudeau Sr. reminds me of how people are starting to look at the Austrian Painter. A mystique that is generally false and needs to die.
While you wrote him as the great combiner of Canada, he will be known in half the country by the Salmon Arm Salute.