More Discontent Over Appeasement Efforts

Continuing with a theme, the discontent over Mark Carney's appeasement efforts continues. One prominent Canadian who is especially displeased is Lloyd Axworthy, who knows a thing or two about politics.

Former Liberal foreign affairs minister Lloyd Axworthy is accusing Prime Minister Mark Carney of taking a "bootlicking" approach to U.S. President Donald Trump at the expense of Canadian values.

"You have to be principled, you have to be tactical, you have to be pragmatic. But you also have to be tough and know what you stand for," Axworthy said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

"Flattery is always part of the game, but you can take it to the point where you actually become unctuous."

Writing primarily about his disappointment in the recent NATO summit, Axworthy also turned his sights on Carney's DST capitulation. 

...his concerns have been further bolstered by Carney's decision to rescind the digital services tax that targeted American tech giants, as the prime minister and Trump undertake what he calls "secret" trade negotiations with no parliamentary scrutiny.

"When do we stop pretending it's all part of some clever negotiating strategy that justifies bootlicking in hopes of tariff concessions?" he wrote in the blog post.

"We find ourselves in a situation where our values are being tested by attacks on democracy and freedoms -- attacks that we must resist," Carney said in his Canada Day remarks.

Meanwhile, letters continue to pour into The Globe and Mail.

Whither the DST?

Re “What is behind Carney walking back the DST?” (Report on Business, July 1): Like Taylor C. Noakes, I am sorely disappointed in Mark Carney for cancelling the digital services tax. In fact, I’m kind of in a rage.

All I can think of to do is to “tax” those big American companies myself, by boycotting them. I’m cancelling my Amazon membership, forgoing Prime, using local taxi companies instead of Uber. I urge all Canadians to consider hitting back at those American transnationals that won’t even pay a paltry 3 per cent in taxes to the Canadians who pay them billions.

Carney may have caved, but the rest of us don’t have to.

Audrey Samson Halifax

Prime Minister Mark Carney has shown regrettable weakness in cancelling the digital services tax – and he may be disappointed if he thinks that concession will be enough to get trade talks back on track. As Taylor C. Noakes argues, there is a perfectly good policy basis for taxing the enormous profits that American tech giants make in Canada. Now what will happen when President Donald Trump goes after our dairy and poultry supply management system, about which he has quite legitimate grounds for complaint, given its protectionist and market-distorting nature? Will that become the hill the Prime Minister chooses to die on?

Peter Maitland Lindsay, Ont.

A show of elbows, please

Re “Carney ‘caved’ on DST, according to U.S.” (July 1): It pains me to find myself in agreement with both the White House and Pierre Poilievre that the Carney Liberals “caved” on the digital services tax.

We’ve just watched the spectacle of tech oligarch Jeff Bezos essentially buying Venice for his multimillion-dollar wedding extravaganza, but we don’t have the stomach to insist that he pay a 3-per-cent tax on the business he does in Canada? Those tax dollars are needed to finance all kinds of public infrastructure and services that support Amazon’s success. Bezos and his tech bros need to pay their fair share.

What happened to the promise of “elbows up” – standing our ground and defending our values?

Susan Watson Guelph, Ont.

And these two from The Star:

I am a strong supporter of Prime Minister Mark Carney and believe he is doing the best possible job given the circumstances he is facing with that irrational, impulsive U.S. President Donald Trump. However, Carney made a mistake by not insisting the tax on the internet companies of America be paid. Probably they would have not paid the tax, choosing a legal battle instead. But his step back from a tariff war with Trump looks like appeasement.

Know thy enemy. Trump is determined to assimilate Canada and Carney must, despite his best instincts to reach a compromise, bite the bullet and against all odds, like Britain in World War II, take him on and refuse to make any more concessions.

If the Canada Day celebrations are any indication, Canadians are ready for the battle and the sacrifices that we are going to suffer. It is difficult to appreciate the hardships we are going to face, combined with the internal dissension from Alberta, to survive as a nation but for loyal Canadians there is no other answer.

David Gladstone, Toronto

If the situation were reversed, Trump would be demanding more

It’s bad enough that U.S. President Donald Trump trash talks all the time, but officials of his administration should know better. I hope Prime Minister Mark Carney will walk back our position to scrap the tax on tech. U.S. tech companies are making millions in Canada; a small per cent of tax is nothing to them. If the situation were the reverse, Trump would be demanding more. 

“It’s very simple. Prime Minister Carney and Canada caved to President Trump and the United States of America,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday afternoon. The quote from the article in the Star is beneath contempt. We should double the price of aluminum right now.

It is time Trump learned what it is to have co-operative trading partner.

Tom McElroy, Toronto 

As I wrote earlier, I find it hard to see how Mark Carney's appeasement of Trump will result in anything good.  Clearly, I am not alone in that sentiment.

 

Charlie Angus Is Worried

 And for good reason.

Thanks to Toby for alerting me to this.

Ashamed And Disgusted

Those two adjectives perhaps succinctly sum up the feeling of many people over Mark Carney's attempt to appease Trump by rescinding the Digital Services Tax. While some commentators are trying to put lipstick on a pig, twisting themselves beyond recognition to justify what the prime minister did, savvy readers of newspapers are having none of it.

Here are some letters from Globe and Mail readers:

Yes, Mr. Trump

Re “Ottawa says talks with U.S. back on after pulling digital services tax” (June 30): By rescinding the digital services tax within a weekend of Donald Trump’s withdrawal from tariff negotiations, Mark Carney has shown that he is no longer negotiating with Mr. Trump to protect Canadians. He is, in fact, continuing to bow down to threats from a bully who belies all reason when it comes to decision-making. Canada may vehemently refuse to become the 51st state, but it seems to have no problem capitulating to Mr. Trump’s demands without much of a fight.

From committing to a 5-per-cent increase in defence spending, at the expense of more pressing domestic priorities, to bulldozing a bill through Parliament that steps all over Indigenous rights and territories and now immediately backing out of a digital services tax more than a year in the making, this government is showing no signs of standing up to fight for Canada and Canadians.

Themrise Khan Ottawa

So Trump has a tantrum and we blink. Is this elbows up? Is this negotiation? Many other sovereign nations have implemented a digital services tax. But I guess the eventual 51st state should not. What’s next, supply management? It is protected by an Act of Parliament? But that law can also be rescinded when Mr. Trump pulls out again in a couple of days.

Sinclair Robinson Ottawa

Knuckling under to Mr. Trump’s blackmail on the digital services tax is a shameful betrayal. Not only is it a weak and pathetic response, it is also stupid. Giving in to blackmail only invites him to do it again and again and again – and he will.

Trevor Hancock Victoria

I used to tell my students that we are as Canadian as the U.S. lets us be. Sadly proven true yet again.

Kevin Byrne Sarnia, Ont.

So we implement a digital services tax, a questionable move on its own, and then we withdraw it because Mr. Trump has a public tantrum. Now we look foolish and weak. Mr. Trump’s bombast, disinformation and bullying represent one end of the negotiation tactic field. The Prime Minister has just identified the other end of that playing field.

Mark Knudsen Mississauga

One of the first rules of negotiation is to give to the other side only if you get something in return. Otherwise, it will encourage them to push for further concessions. Eliminating the digital services tax on U.S. tech giants is a step backward for Canada. We are chipping away at Canadian sovereignty by allowing the president of another country to set our tax policy.

Neil Tudiver Ottawa

And this one from The Star:

Carney cancelling the digital services tax a weak move

Canada cancelled its digital services tax. What was it and why did the U.S. hate it? June 30

I am horrified to see that Prime Minister Mark Carney has given in to Trump and cancelled the digital services tax.

What makes Carney think Trump will now treat Canada fairly? Is he afraid of the big online companies, the oligarchs?

It’s past time to stand up to Trump and his gang, and make Canada self-sufficient.

Kate Chung, Toronto 

No one more than me would like to be proven wrong in condemning Carney for this move. I just don't see that happening, however.

UPDATED: What Canadian Pride?

On the day before Canada Day, I doubt I am the only one to feel utterly outraged this morning. Our government, which has gone to great measures to stoke our Canadian pride,  has betrayed all of us. It has succumbed to Trump's threats and rescinded the Digital Services Tax.

The announcement came following a phone call between Prime Minister Mark Carney and U.S. President Donald Trump, and just hours before the first payment under the tax was going to come due for major tech companies like Amazon and Google. 

On Friday Trump announced on his social media platform Truth Social he was terminating all trade discussions with Canada because of the tax.

The tax, which was set to be collected starting today, was unpopular with the U.S., and Trump had one of his many tantrums. In rescinding it, as opposed to possibly suspending it, Canada has shown itself to be at Trump's mercy.

Daniel Béland, a politics professor at McGill University in Montreal, called Carney’s retreat a “clear victory” for Trump.

“At some point this move might have become necessary in the context of Canada-US trade negotiations themselves but Prime Minister Carney acted now to appease President Trump and have him agree to simply resume these negotiations, which is a clear victory for both the White House and big tech,” Béland said.

He said it makes Carney look vulnerable to President Trump’s outbursts.

“President Trump forced PM Carney to do exactly what big tech wanted. U.S. tech executives will be very happy with this outcome,” Béland said.

Notably, the U.S. finalized a trade deal with the U.K last month, despite the fact that country has a 2% DST.

One can only expect more American abuse and craven Canadian submission ahead. 

In Sunday’s interview [on Fox], Mr. Trump also criticized Canada’s supply-management system, which strictly controls imports of eggs, dairy and poultry to protect domestic producers.

I don't know what I will be doing tomorrow on Canada Day. One thing I won't  be doing is celebrating Canadian 'pride'. 

UPDATED: If, despite the above, your pride is still intact, try this one on for size:

Karoline Leavitt, Mr. Trump’s chief spokeswoman, told a press briefing Monday that Mr. Carney telephoned Mr. Trump to inform him that Ottawa would be cancelling the tax, two days after Mr. Trump threatened to walk away from trade talks and impose retaliatory tariffs over the levy, and one day before the first payment of the tax was meant to be collected.

“It’s very simple: Prime Minister Carney and Canada caved to President Trump and the United States of America,” Ms. Leavitt said. “The President made his position quite clear to the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister called the President last night to let the President know that he would be dropping that tax.”

And from the horse's mouth: 

UPDATED UPDATE: 

University of Ottawa professor Michael Geist, who is Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law, said Canada came out of this exchange over the DST looking weak.

By scrapping the DST now, Canada has “given up what was a non-trivial card and they basically used it to get back exactly where they were a week ago,” Prof. Geist said. 

And this from The Globe and Mail's Robyn Urback: 

Killing the DST now reeks of desperation. It is a capitulation without reward; the U.S. has since agreed to resume negotiations – but that’s it: talks. The mercurial Donald Trump could decide that supply management is his real gripe, and call talks off again. Should that happen, we would be weaker than we were before since we have robbed ourselves of a bargaining chip in the DST that we could have used if, for example, Mr. Champagne announced that Canada was pausing or delaying collections, rather than rescinding the legislation altogether.

The message this decision sends to Canadians is that our domestic policy is being set by the White House, and the message it sends the White House is that we are pathetic little weaklings who will bend to the President’s whims. 

Silence Is Not An Option

About a week ago, Gabor Mate wrote a heartfelt piece about the genocide in Gaza. His thesis was that we must speak out against the carnage. Mate is Jewish, and that fact lent heft to his argument that criticism of Israel cannot be conflated with anti-semitism, a stance I have long held. For too long,  condemnation of Israel's slaughter of Gazans has been muted for fear of wearing that odious label. If you have access to The Star, I would encourage you to read it.

Star readers are united in their agreement with Mate. Following are some letters to the editor that unconditionally support his position.

Silence is not an option, and if images coming from Gaza of emaciated children being deliberately starved don’t get us to speak up loudly, nothing will. Gabor Maté lays out the reasons we should be able to do so without fear of being called antisemitic. It seems that the true meaning behind the phrase “never again” has been forgotten.

Paul Kahnert, Markham, ON

I agree 100 per cent with Maté that silence is not an option when Israel continues to slaughter children, as well as hospital patients and workers. This whole situation is enraging. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu plays on our collective guilt about the Holocaust, but enough is enough. His behaviour is that of a crazed and power-hungry leader who’s bent on destroying Palestine, and it’s being abetted by the United States. Starving innocent Gazans while destroying their homes and their country is inhumane. I have many Jewish friends who don’t support Netanyahu’s actions. Silence will only enable Israel. It’s about time the rest of the world woke up and called a spade a spade.

Lillian Shery, Toronto

Maté deserves thanks for writing this article, and the Star deserves praise for having had the courage to publish it. Governments, workplaces and school boards in Canada have too often assented to the notion that criticism of Israel is automatically antisemitic and deserving of punishment. The fact that some Jewish children don’t feel safe is used as an excuse to ban expressions of sympathy for Palestinians in Gaza, where people also don’t feel safe — and for much clearer reasons. My opinion of what Netanyahu and the Israeli military are doing to Palestine doesn’t make me pro-Hamas or pro-terrorism. As Canadians, we should never be discriminated against for speaking out about injustice, wherever it occurs. And Israel should not be exempt from a clear examination of what it’s doing in Gaza.

Caroline Andrews, Toronto

It’s been well-documented that the Israeli Defense Forces have committed atrocities in Gaza. As citizens, we should be able to express our opinions about Israel’s actions without fear of being branded antisemitic. I have Jewish and Palestinian friends, and all any of us wants is peace in Gaza and a settlement that is amenable to both parties in the conflict.

Bill Melvin, Toronto

Speaking out may seem thin gruel when one contemplates the carnage in Gaza. However, remaining silent does no service to the starvation, mutilation and death taking place there, and can only compound the moral injury many of us feel when bearing witness to the slaughter.

I'll close with an small excerpt from Mate's piece:

The only resolution is the freeing of the discussion around Gaza. People deserve the right to experience as much liberty to publicly mourn, question, oppose, deplore, denounce what they perceive as the perpetration of injustice and inhumanity as they are, in this country, to advocate for the aims and actions of the Israeli government and its Canadian abettors amongst our political leadership, academia, and media.

We Should Not Be Surprised

Well, the news has come in that Trump is cancelling trade negotiations with Canada over our digital services tax, which he says is an attack on the U.S. He promises punishing tariffs for our 'temerity'.

No doubt he expects us all to quiver and cave. I think it's time to take the gloves off and really hurt the Americans at least as much as they intend to hurt us.

Here's a video that articulates a Western view about life in the U.S. and the need to act:

The Mighty Euphemism

I have still not recovered my equilibrium vis-a-vis the world, so the following are not my words. I got them from a Facebook group called Films for Action. Nonetheless, they echo exactly what George Orwell said so many years ago.

Propaganda starts with the manipulation of language. The goal is to render violence morally palatable when committed by those aligned with imperial interests.

Noam Chomsky has long argued that the most effective propaganda in democratic societies is not the outright lie, but the strategic framing that defines the bounds of acceptable thought. This happens not by controlling what we think, but by controlling what we think about, and more crucially, how we talk about it.

Consider the way governments are described. Allies of empire are governed by “administrations” or “democracies,” while enemies have “regimes.” Allies engage in “preemptive strikes” or “targeted operations,” while others “attack” or “escalate.” Our allies “defend themselves”; their enemies are “aggressors.” When a powerful nation stockpiles nuclear weapons, it is “deterrence.” When an enemy pursues the same, it’s a “threat.”

These choices aren’t accidental. They signal who the audience should empathize with and who they should fear. They suggest legitimacy or illegitimacy without ever needing to make a direct argument. It’s not that one country does self-defense while another does terrorism—it’s that the label itself is a tool of propaganda, applied selectively to support imperial policy.

This manipulation of language also defines who is human and who is not. Our civilians are “families,” “children,” “innocent lives lost.” Theirs are “collateral damage.” We never “bomb a city”; we “neutralize targets.” They never “resist”; they “foment instability.”

This is how public consent is engineered—not with force, but with framing. Through decades of this conditioning, populations come to internalize the narrative: that our wars are necessary, our allies righteous, our enemies barbaric. Even when the facts are plain, the language inoculates the public against outrage.

But once you start seeing these linguistic patterns, you can’t unsee them. And that’s when the real work begins—challenging the narrative, exposing the frame, and refusing to accept the moral double standards that justify endless war under the banner of peace.

Given the Americans' involvement in yet another war, one might be well-advised to look for ongoing, even greater, perversions of language and thought.