When has the federal reserve influenced foreign policy then or even domestic policy? How exactly does it help Israel?
You’ve drawn a parallel…OK and then what? How does the majority of them being of Jewish background (and that’s assuming 1- they’re religious not just of the ethnicity and 2- that they’re Zionist) drive your point home exactly?
If we’re willing to abandon Democratic principles when war (actual battle) hasn’t even been declared, then I don’t see much hope for what will be left of our current democracy when/if that happens.
Done the same and worse to Mexico. They’re neither arming up or dismantling parts of their democratic process.
If this is how we’re rolling over with the “existential threat” of Trump going back and forth about a 51st state, the hell is going to happen if/when an actual war breaks out?
That’s literally why the article is titled the way it is. War powers as if its wartime. But its not wartime.
Well I’m just glad that someone is mentioning disaster capitalism and that really is my main point to the premise of this post about centralization of power.
My “war” in quotations was about the economic war. Trump’s posturing is fucked up, aggressive, and definitely threatening; and he was betting on Canada buying weapons from the US for protection like Denmark is doing.
Um…its not a choice of centralization or decentralization of power. What? Those aren’t the only choices!
Point: The choice is don’t go against the Democratic process and principles.
Like when he made a partisan appointment to roles of governance
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mark-carney-senate-tom-pitfield-9.7261037
Prime minister ends Trudeau-era policy of nonpartisan appointments
Following that thread, him appointing Martel to open another seat in that riding which Carney is betting goes to a liberal seat
On the one hand, the Prime Minister gets to say that he’s non-partisan by appointing a Conservative to the Senate. On the other hand, creating an opening in Chicoutimi—Le Fjord creates a situation where the Liberals can win another seat
The liberal majority can already pass laws through with little discussion as we’ve seen with bill c-22 unfortunately. The majority is a democratically given centralization, for sure, but passing laws undemocratically and making partisan appointments is not the right way.
And Denmark didn’t centralize their government if you want to use that example. They increased spending, sure, but didn’t go against political norms.
Well thanks for the added context. My understanding was that the profits were going to Canada considering that we paid for the bridge.
I guess the Moroun’s really obfuscated the information out there.
What do you think tariffs are? They’re literally defined as isolationist and protectionist methods by a government.
https://www.progressivepolicy.org/tariffs-and-economic-isolationism-four-principles-for-a-response/
https://uslawexplained.com/isolationism
Here’s a wikipedia article if you’d like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff
It’s also the terminology applied preceding to WW2 when isolationist policies of European countries applied tariffs to imports from competing empires. Which is why the couldn’t recover well from WW1.
So I appreciate the condescending tone, I really do.
But if your only issue with my comment is that “I don’t understand tariffs” and that’s what you decided to be aggressive about when the main premise is Carney’s overreach of power, then that’s not my problem.
I’m sorry, why would it be considered a misconception that I don’t want power centralized?
My friend, the point is he’s governing as if it’s a military war by centralizing the power of government. If you were looking at a different country and saw the same actions, you would judge their leadership a lot more harshly
But it’ll forever be split with the US. So Canada will get half of the money that it was supposed to get.
I’m sorry, isolationism by the US is not “war” no matter how much the media tries to use that specifically terminology.
And neither is it an excuse for centralizing power, making partisan appointments when they’ve historically been democratic, or running up a war budget when a quarter of the population can’t afford food on the table.
The writing style really spoke to me. I felt as frustrated as the writer.
If he cared about sovereignty, he wouldn’t entertain Alberta separatism and should try to call it out for what it is.
Mark’s concerns are the bottom line. Always have been. Guy’s net worth is 10mil - i don’t think he even knows what the average Canadian (i.e. 1/4 go hungry) even feel.
He’s playing both sides so he can always come out on top.
Especially since there’s a growing Republican base that’s against war and against funding going to Israel
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/chinese-ev-canada-9.7270657
It’s expected to cost less than $35,000 Cdn.
There’s still no mention of price tag, just that it’ll cost less than 35k based on what the import agreement stipulates (i.e. half* the quota of EVs cost less than 35k and half more).
So this will be part of the under 35k quota
Edited a word
I don’t think your method of open ended questions when pointing out some Jewish people as heads of banks (Rothschilds and heads of the federal reserve) hides from your antisemitism.
Example: A good portion of C-suite executives in tech are of indian descent. If they decide to start sending money to Modi or funding parties in the US because of their belief in Hindutva, doesn’t mean that it’s a global conspiracy or that “they control tech”.
They’re just rich assholes funding a fascist movement - not to mention the other rich assholes that put money behind movements like that for their own enrichment or ideas (like Zionist Christians who are a much bigger population than Jewish Zionists and very wealthy).
Wealthy benefactors will put down money for a cause they like, bad or good. And if it happens to be a good ROI, then that’s all the more reason they’d do it.
Making blanket statements of an ethnicity is racist. Especially when structured power dynamics exist and are very obvious.
Most of the Zionist immigration actually occurred before the Holocaust. In fact, the Zionists were actively refusing Jewish refugees because they would have “tainted” the movement.
https://palestinenexus.com/articles/eugenicism
From the late 19th century through the 1950s, Zionist leaders adopted a selective immigration policy designed to exclude ‘undesirable’ Jews.
Menahem Sheinkin described them as “miserable paupers, depressed and patched up, with bundles like rag-merchants, the poorest of the poor, who could not possibly be a blessing to the country.”
By the early 1900s, an office was established in Jaffa to screen Jews hoping to settle in Palestine. Menachem Sheinkin and Arthur Ruppin reviewed application letters sent from prospective migrants and told 61% of them not to come, primarily because they were too impoverished.
I sympathize with those who suffered due to antisemitism over millenia and during the holocaust. But I have zero sympathy for fascist colonials who created founding myths based off the suffering of others that they actively turned away.
Yes, and Iran invasion, and Cuba blockade, etc…
Again, we are not at open war (bullets flying, missiles dropping) for us to not care if centralization of power or when subverting parts of our democracy is happening.
The premise of the post and article is centralization of power as if it’s wartime, and we’re not at active war.