The Dangers of a Single Ideology or Can a One trick Pony ever Change His Mind - part 2

Given that a bully now is in control of the political and economic agenda of the US, Canada needs to decide what to do about it. How do we, as a country, live next door to what has always been a bit of an elephant (we are the mouse) who has fairly frequently been less than careful as to where to put its feet and now appears to not even pretend to care? There are two clear choices - act like the Dalai Lama or become as protectionist and as aggressive as Trump.

The former model suggest that Canada follows its present course of trying to find that impossible balances between the economy growing and protecting the environment, between accepting refugees and overwhelming our capacity to support newcomers, between encouraging those who are different and supportive of those who are afraid of change and of supporting individuals in terms of education and health care while not running out of money. This path would require us to ignore the posturing of Trump and to do what we think is right - knowing that we might get it wrong on occasion.  Canada would continue to be, and even enhance our role of being leaders in the international community when it comes to looking for constructive ways of engaging other countries.

This strategy of giving because it is right to do so, of not fighting back because it is wrong and always looking for the peaceful, non-confrontational approach has not work out that well for Tibet. The people have no power to control their lives or their environment, their culture has been eroded by the thousands of Chinese who have moved into their country and by the foreign laws that have been imposed upon them. Every year it feels as if fewer and fewer countries and individuals can envision a time when Tibet will be free of the Chinese government. The danger of this approach for Canada is that Trump and his minions will see Canada as being even more ineffective and irrelevant. The risk of Canada being consumed by American policies specifically around trade, immigration  and human rights would be overwhelming and perhaps unstoppable. The very fact that the Trudeau government has delayed announcing its peace keeping commitments while waiting for a clearer picture of Trump's international policies suggest that we are already on a slippery path of policy subservience. What about the decriminalization of marijuana or protecting our waterways? Will they be on hold if the US says no? It has happened before.

At the other end of the continuum, Canada could react aggressively to Trump and his apparent plans to impose a tariff on soft wood lumber, demand a bigger cut of the oil that will flow the Trans-Canada's pipeline and renegotiate or dismantle Nafta. For example if a tariff is imposed upon lumber being shipped south - stop shipping it. As before, house builders in the northern States who have become dependent upon our wood to build houses - will have to do without. The last time a tariff was imposed - it was those builders who complained. Perhaps at the same time Canada should impose a tariff on products coming into Canada. This of course would cause immense hardship upon families who depend on the income from our lumber companies to survive and make some of the things that we buy from the USA far more expensive. Not only would the government need to assist those companies but as well would need to create a method by which families and individuals affected would be supported. But it would give the US government a clear message - if you can't negotiate in good faith - go somewhere else. Maybe it is time that we recognize that allowing the US to be our biggest trading partner is a bad idea - especially if they do not respect us.

There are obvious thousands of options along the continuum. But there needs to be a national conversation of how we should respond. Yes - we are always ready to negotiate, always ready to look for ways will enhance both countries. But being a "push-over", of accepting a bad deal because any deal is better than nothing might not be the best option.  Somehow, while remaining true to our convictions - we need to be clear that any trade war will affect their economy too. In spite of the USA's greater economic size - we must see ourselves as equals. Trump can only negotiate from a position of power if we allow him to do so.

We teach our children that we, as a society, need to stand up to bullies. Perhaps it is time that the adults started to do what we tell our kids to do.

The Dangers of a Single Ideology or Can a One trick Pony ever Change His Mind

I have fought the temptation to comment on the last month of the new America under Trump - yes I know that it has in fact been less than a week - but it feels like a month. I have lost that battle.

There is so much to say, and for a Canadian most of what I would say would be a waste of time. I am not too sure if Trump has any understanding of our history or our relationship with the country he now runs. In fact, I am not too sure if his understanding of that country is much deeper than the top 1%.  For Canadians to rant and rave what a buffoon he is, or how misguided his first few executive orders have been seems to be a useless expenditure of energy.  I find it absolutely mind boggling that people can defend some of his outrageous comments, that the phrase "alternative facts" seems to be accepted has being the same as the truth or that one person can undo so many things, so quickly. But those things are happening.

If his executive orders only affected citizens of the US, perhaps I would be less concerned. However,  his comments and his decisions may affect my life in Canada. That, I think, gives me the right and the responsibility to think about and to comment on occasion. It is not enough to sit back and say - not my problem.

Mr. Trump only has one set of skills - he knows how to negotiate from a place of strength. He does it by being bombastic, occasionally by bullying and in general, acting as if he is total oblivious to anything outside his narrow tunnel of vision. There is no sense that he knows how to compromise or that he is a team player. Any country that wants to/needs to negotiate with his government is at an extreme disadvantage because he assumes he is in a position of power. I suspect for Trump, negotiation only means how can I brow beat/manipulate you to give me what I want. As soon as that does not work - he throws a hissy fit, changes the rules or walk away from the table blaming the other party. That strategy might work when one is planning on building a hotel - I don't think it works when you are running a country. Unless of course everyone is too afraid to stand up to him.

It seems as if the "big" three American automakers might be among the first CEOs to stand up and salute their new leader. There might be some advantage on getting rid of the Japanese/Korean auto makers that have, for the last 30 years, consistently outsold the American car companies. If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler companies are told that they can only sell cars in the USA if those cars are built in the USA, but are given the right kinds of incentives including the breaking of unions and tax incentives that ensure greater personal and corporate profits - such a policy may make sense to them (but not to the thousands of Americans who work for Honda, Toyota etc.).  In spite of the fact that those CEOs know how complicated and how intertwined the three countries are (Canada, USA and Mexico) in the building of our cars, they are not standing up and telling the president that he is wrong. Perhaps the dangers of them disagreeing in public with the president may be deemed to be far greater than any benefits.

It is a slippery slope. If the first group of companies bow down - then it become increasingly harder for other companies to disagree. And who will want to? Oil companies will kiss Trump's feet if he limits or eradicates  any environmental standards, banks will praise him if they are deregulated, the far right will dance in public if gay rights, woman's rights and any other segment of society other than theirs, loses legal protection, both large and small corporations will sign up to be on his donations list if what little protection left for unions is taken away and the poor sot who voted for him will be thankful if life doesn't get any worse.

If change is going to occur, or at the very least if citizens of the US want to slow down the destruction of what they have, marching in the streets is not going to do it. Member of unions need to stand up and use what power they have to get the CEOs and stock holders to listen, employees of the federal government need to stand up and say what is happening to the health care or to the environment. People have only power when they are prepared to put their economic power on the line. That means the best paid people in the US, those who have good jobs need to stand up for others who are not so fortunate.

I am afraid however, that they too will be too afraid to voice their discontent. In the new world where the leader says that only his view and his beliefs are of value - it seems far more likely that people will act the same way.