Speaking in Australia, Carney said he would “never categorically rule out” Canadian military involvement in defending allies from Iran, but added it’s distinct from offensive actions being taken by the US/Israel. “We will always stand by and defend our allies when called upon”
— Brian Platt (@brianplatt.bsky.social) March 4, 2026 at 7:35 PM
“There’s a distinction between the offensive actions that were taken, and are being taken, by the United States and Israel…We’re not party to those actions. But we will always defend Canadians. We will always stand by and defend our allies when called upon.” www.bloomberg.com/news/article...
— Brian Platt (@brianplatt.bsky.social) March 4, 2026 at 9:28 PM
[image or embed]
...Prime Minister Mark Carney, very quickly out of the gate, endorsed this military action. Should he have?Now Carney is in Australia - here are some of the best interviews and speeches.
This is a complicated question. I don’t say this as a value judgment, just as an empirical matter, but with the radicalism of the change in foreign policy that Carney has brought, Carney is the least Pearsonian prime minister in Canadian history.
The Carney view is, while Canada spent much of its existence as a nation under the protection of the superpower of the day — first Great Britain, then the United States — under that protection, Canadians never had to worry much about their own security. That was somebody else’s job. So Canadian foreign policy could focus on values.
Carney is now saying, Canada has lost its superpower protector, for the first time since 1867. And in that world, Canada must act in a much more cold-blooded and amoral way. And that’s why it must forgive India for committing assassinations on Canadian soil. It must forgive China for interfering in Canadian elections and brutalizing Chinese Canadians on Canadian soil. And it must accept the American intervention in Iran, because those are all things that are important to those much greater powers, and Canada needs to navigate between India, China, and the United States in a world in which Canadian security is much less secure than it ever has been before, and there’s no room in this complicated equation for Pearsonian talk. Canada is out of that business forever.
That seems to be what he’s saying, and it’s very radical.
Let’s pivot to what you see happening on Canadian-American relations. A lot of our politicians are trying very hard to influence this administration, everything from Premier Doug Ford’s commercials featuring former president Ronald Reagan, to Conservative MP Jamil Jivani visiting his old friend the vice-president JD Vance. Is there any evidence that any of that is working?
Well, the fact that it doesn’t work doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do it.
Canadians are not wrong to use the tried-and-true methods first. Politics is extremely hard, and the fact that things don’t work doesn’t mean you are foolish to try them. It’s worth the effort.
And it was also worth taking the measure of how much of Trump’s hostility to Canada was just bluster, and how much of it was settled implacable malice. I think it’s the latter.
And it has taken time for Canadians to accept that that could be true, because it’s so different. It’s so shocking. Canada has a whole history that goes back to the meeting between Franklin Roosevelt and Mackenzie King at Ogdensburg (New York) in the ‘30s, where Roosevelt said an attack on Canadian territory will be (considered) an attack on the United States. It’s America’s first permanent security guarantee to any country. And now that logic has changed, and it’s hard to adjust.
Many people up here wonder whether we should be expending so much effort on a renewed trade agreement with the U.S., because they fear even if he signs it, Trump won’t adhere to it anyway. What’s your view?
As scary and threatening as Trump is, he has one thing in common with every other previous president, which is, he starts with a bucket of minutes, and every day he spends the minutes, and they never return. And as you spend the minutes, the president almost always gets weaker.
So, the longer Canada postpones agreements with Trump, the better Canada will do.
In which Mark Carney drops the F bomb while talking about having drank too much wine 😅 (they muted it out for youtube of course *eye roll* it was more of that whispered fuck as opposed to loud dropping it) www.youtube.com/shorts/Z6vWP...
— Krista D. Ball: Canada's Mean Potato (@kristadb1.bsky.social) March 4, 2026 at 2:07 PM
[image or embed]
So far we’ve heard 12 different primary reasons for the war, 7 different main objectives, and 5 different exit strategies.
— Ron Filipkowski (@ronfilipkowski.bsky.social) March 2, 2026 at 3:12 PM
— George Conway ⚖️🇺🇸 (@gtconway.bsky.social) March 2, 2026 at 7:37 AM
The glibness. The indifference. The carelessness. The utter lack of planning for a war against a country of 90M. The sickness of a man who acts on whim that will kill thousands not hundreds. The horror of a regime that enables this sickness. The broken body politic that votes in such malignancy.
— Steven Beschloss (@stevenbeschloss.bsky.social) March 2, 2026 at 7:39 PM
For Europeans looking in: - The Greens are the only party in England advocating a new EU referendum. - Pro brexit Labour lost. - Pro brexit, anti ECHR and right wing Reform party lost. This might be a big moment in Britain - turning away from the far right.
— GylesNaMopaleen (@gylesnamopaleen.bsky.social) February 27, 2026 at 12:14 AM
[image or embed]
Now there is hope! It's no longer a choice between grim and grimmer. We can vote for who we want and win. Anywhere. It's just one constituency, but the Green victory in Gorton and Denton is an electric shock to our political system.
— George Monbiot (@georgemonbiot.bsky.social) February 27, 2026 at 1:33 AM
View on Threads
PM Carney about the State of Union address: “I didn’t watch it.” 😂🤣😅 I love this guy 😅🤣
— 🍁🇨🇦Team Canada Forever🇨🇦🍁 (@teamcanadaforever.bsky.social) February 25, 2026 at 6:50 PM
[image or embed]
View on Threads
Definitely the first State of the Union where the president talked about the military killing unarmed fishermen as a laugh line
— Tom Scocca (@tomscocca.bsky.social) February 24, 2026 at 9:44 PM
"Holy shit, did WE ever make the right decision" - The US Women's Hockey Team
— The Daily Show (@thedailyshow.com) February 24, 2026 at 10:01 PM
View on Threads
We’re back to the racist and MAGA scapegoating of immigrants and asylum seekers for the failing healthcare systems. #QP
— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) February 24, 2026 at 1:34 PM
....if everything is just attention now, and attention is completely commodified by algorithmic tech platforms, how can you push back against that? Well, I am slowly coming around to a theory on the new cool: You have to essentially pre-deplatform yourself.Broderick follows up with a related piece this week An endless feed of celebrities eating chicken wings.
Culture right now is determined not by human teams of editors and producers picking and choosing what youth culture gets the spotlight, but, instead, by the unthinking algorithms that power YouTube and TikTok. Which means the only things that have the level of scarcity and danger required to be seen as cool by young people will, slowly, but surely, be whatever is unacceptable on those platforms.
... But politics, left or right, is actually not actually the most subversive thing you can do right now. It’s copyright infringement.
In 2022, filmmaker Vera Drew created a movie called The People’s Joker, which turned the story of The Joker from Batman into a trans allegory. Drew received a cease and desist from Warner Bros. and held guerilla screenings of the film until the rights were worked out. And this trend, of filmmakers using the corpse of the theater system to bypass the world of algorithms, has only continued. The 2022 film Hundreds Of Beavers had a similar renegade quality to how it was screened. Hell, even Taylor Swift was savvy enough to screen the Eras Tour concert in theaters directly through AMC. And you could argue that’s what YouTuber Mark “Markiplier” Fischbach just did with Iron Lung, which bypassed the studio system entirely and caused such a stir in Hollywood its massive ticket sales were removed from box office charts.
In fact, just this week, filmmaker Matt Johnson released Nirvanna The Band The Show The Movie. It had the biggest opening ever for a live-action Canadian film and not only is the film itself a massive copyright rats nest, but the web series it’s based on is completely illegal to watch on streaming platforms currently. Johnson, at a screening I attended last week, said he was excited to find out if they were going to get sued once the film debuted this week. (They haven’t yet, it seems.)
... The culture that feels the most dangerous, and, thus, exciting to young people, will be what you can’t see online. And the most dangerous thing for platforms is not racist garbage. It’s unmonetizeable content. The “metric” that will matter most going forward will not be the numbers at the bottom of a post or video, but the human beings in a room that left their house to experience something. Which, of course, will be filmed and put back online. You can’t escape the matrix entirely.
Canada now has 19 medals at the Olympics after this Ivanie Blondin silver. And with guaranteed medals in curling and hockey, Canada will surpass 20 medals at the Winter Olympics once again. It’s a streak that started 20 years ago in Italy. And continues.
— Devin Heroux (@devinheroux.bsky.social) February 21, 2026 at 10:43 AM
(On a side note, it always amuses me when reporters get so prissy about somebody swearing. Of course, if I had a job where I could be fired for dropping an f-bomb, I guess I'd be pretty careful about it too.)View on Threads
...Many pundits and observers have clearly stated that Smith wants, and maybe even needs a campaign. She’s at her best when she’s meeting with people directly, not in the legislature.
A polarizing referendum gives her the opportunity to control with certainty what she wouldn’t be able to control in an early election, the election question.
And with a referendum, she gets complete control over what the questions are, how they are framed, where she gets to place herself, and perhaps most importantly, where she gets to place her opponents.
The referendum she announced tonight has two major themes.
The first is immigration.
Even Smith acknowledged that because she is attempting to alter the social fabric of the province so drastically, she needs a mandate to do so.
How does she intend to alter it?
On October 19, 2026, Smith will be asking Albertans for a mandate to...
-Giving Alberta greater control over immigration in order to decrease it and prioritizing Albertan jobs to Albertans first.
-Introducing a law to limit access to services to only Canadian citizens, permanent residents or people that Alberta approves of.
-Introducing a low requiring 12 months of residency in Alberta before accessing Alberta social programs.
-Charging fees for non-citizens or non-permanent residents to access healthcare and education.
-Requiring proof of citizenship, such as a passport, birth certificate, or citizenship card to vote in provincial elections.
So while many Americans are preparing for midterms that many expect will be the first major repudiation of MAGA, Danielle SMith is embracing some of their core principles.
But that’s not all...
Smith is also bringing forward 4 questions on constitutional changes.
Despite the requirements for constitutional change being outside of the reach of a single province, Smith will be asking Albertans if they...
-Believe that provincial governments should appoint all judges at all levels.
-Believe that the senate should be abolished.
-Believe that provinces should be allowed to opt out of federal programs “intruding on provincial jurisdiction such as health, education, and social services, without losing any of the associated federal funding” for use in their own provincial social programs.
-Believe that provincial laws should be given supremacy when they are in conflict with federal laws.
It is the last two that Albertans should be paying closest attention to in this bunch.
Smith has framed the relationship between the provinces and the federal government as one being locked in eternal conflict and is creating a de facto state of administrative separation instead of a literal one that separatists are advocating for across the province (albeit in smaller numbers than they would like to admit).
Again, any of these constitutional changes are outside of the reach of a single province to enact and if Alberta’s last referendum on equalization is any kind of barometer on the direct weight and consequence of what these questions can accomplish, they are likely of little concern in that context.
But that’s far from the real point, or the real risks.
Canada is under attack economically and under threat geographically from it’s former best friend. Donald Trump and his ilk have repeatedly made threats of taking over Canada and making it the 51st state.
At perhaps one of the most important times in Canada’s history for national unity to be a priority, Smith is seeking a mandate to drive a wedge directly into the heart of Confederation.
Make no mistake, with this last batch of questions, the subtext of all of these questions is, “Are you an Albertan first or a Canadian first?” There’s no room in this referendum for those identities to be equally weighted.
And that fact alone shows a fundamental failure to meet the demands of the moment on behalf of the people she has been elected to represent.