Musical interlude

Phantogram - Move In Silence

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Alex Cosh discusses how our response to the new Trump administration needs to move beyond avoiding tariffs toward routing our international relations around a clear and present danger. And Ashleigh Stewart reports that Steve Bannon's plans to for "hemispheric control" go far beyond trade as well. 

- David Smith highlights how Trump is following in the footsteps of Viktor Orban (who is of course a model for Canadian Cons as well in his attacks on democracy). Paul Krugman writes that the key factor to watch for at this stage is the concentration of power via autogolpe. Moira Donegan writes about Elon Musk's effective control through shadow government mechanisms, while Robert Reich examines his minions' burrowing into government computer systems (which Charlie Warzel and Ian Bogost observe to be a terrifying reality according to the people who know those systems best),

- Meanwhile, Mark Frauenfelder highlights how Google's monetized reCAPTCHA system is simultaneously a means of tracking people in alarming detail, a profit centre and a massive waste of time for users. And Charlotte Cowles discusses the current reality of surveillance pricing. 

- Brittany Welsh and Julian Aherne report on a new study showing that Ontario's cottage country lakes aren't immune from the proliferation of microplastics, while Tik Root and Joseph Winters report on Exxon's plans to spend billions of dollars making the problem worse. Lorne Fitch notes that Alberta coal spokesflacks are pushing nonsense research to claim that selenium contamination is just fine for you, while Phillip Meintzer points out how four oil sands companies have signed on to endorse increased cancer rates for Indigenous communities. And Zoya Teirstein discusses how the smoke from California's recent wildfires is particularly toxic due to the large amount of plastic and chemical content. 

- Finally, the Climate Institute examines the importance of building new housing in areas which mitigate the likelihood of climate-related emergencies - rather than in ones which are particularly vulnerable to them (or already the sites of recent disasters). And Katya Schwenk reports on the greed and folly of real estate developoers pushing to be build developments in areas which are already running out of water. 

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Tyler McBrien writes about the U.S.' state capture which makes it impossible to know who's making decisions which can have catastrophic effects (let alone allow for any democratic accountability). Gil Duran examines the techbro plan to install a CEO-dictator to control the U.S. in place of any responsive government, while Brian Merchant discusses the attempt to build an AI-based permission structure to allow that state of affairs to continue. Adam Gurri argues that Elon Musk is a greater threat to the U.S. public than Donald Trump. Jonathan Last notes that in addition to historic dictators, the apparent models for Musk's takeover of the U.S. include Batman villains. Mike Brock points out Musk's obvious conflicts of interest (and the utter impossibility of his being able to avoid them even if he wanted to). 

- Robert Reich details the coup in progress against the U.S. government. Don Moynihan discusses why Musk's takeover and manipulation of data is no less important than his seizure of the public purse. Mike Masnick points out the obvious risks of allowing a takeover of - and backdoor into - the U.S.' public payments system. 

- Frank Miroslav offers the hopeful view that Trump may be stupid enough to fall short of the damage he intends to inflict, while Hamilton Nolan notes that the corporate sector had also proven its own idiocy by supporting a chaotic regime which makes any predictable development impossible. Robert Kuttner writes that the U.S. needs a more effective opposition than a Democratic Party which is utterly supine in the face of corporate corruption, while Les Leopold points out the need for a political movement for working people. And Blair Fix highlights how Republicans have used populist messaging to further concentrate the wealth and power of plutocrats. 

- Marv Shaffer warns against limiting Canada's response to the protection of our own corporate class against tariffs when there's a need for massive international cooperation to fill a vacuum of influence and support, while Simon Enoch likewise notes that we shouldn't allow business lobby groups to turn our response into a profit centre and source of leverage against the public. Heather Mallick discusses the need for a wartime footing which includes focusing on necessities rather than conspicuous consumption. And Nora Loreto writes that one of the major challenges in assembling a principled response in the face of a threat is the dismantling of Canadian culture at the behest of corporate forces.

- Eric Wickham talks to experts about the need to become less dependent on the U.S. And the National Farmers Union highlights how to protect food sovereignty in the face of a hostile neighbour, while Charles Conten and Tia Hentra discuss how the electric vehicle industry can thrive regardless of what Trump does.  

- Finally, David Moscrop points out how Doug Ford's continued attachment to both Trump and Musk shows him to be absolutely unfit to hold power. And Shellene Drakes-Tull writes about the level of contrived naivete needed for Ford to express surprise that Trump would follow through on his threats toward Canada.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Tim Snyder calls out the coup in progress as unelected lackeys take over major elements of the U.S.' government, while Jamelle Bouie rightly makes the case that the damage being done to the U.S.' constitutional order by the combination of a power-mad executive and fully compliant legislative branch is irreversible. Elizabeth Popp Berman discusses how unilateral control over government payments by an unelected political crony represents the end of any pretense of democracy, while David Dayen points out the flagrant illegality of Elon Musk's usurpation of that power. Jill Filipovic writes about the Trump administration's scheme to asset-strip the U.S. government. 

- Robert Reich writes that the point of Trump's trade posturing is to demonstrate a willingness to punish anybody who doesn't bow before him. Kaylin Hamilton discusses the futility of limiting opposition to demands for civility which ultimately serve only to further empower those already in control. And Greg Sargent interviews Andy Craig about the options that are available to meaningfully respond - including loud protest backed by every available action. 

- Paresh Dave and Caroline Haskins report that Google's place within the new authoritarian regime includes reversing a policy which previously prohibited its AI from being used for weapons and surveillance. Oliver Milman reports on the state of fear among scientists as all accurate information about climate change is purged from official sources. And Jeff Tollefson points out the impending clash between a regime insistent on pushing dirty fossil fuels to enrich a major donor group, and a transition to more affordable clean energy already in progress. 

- Pete McMartin discusses why Canada and other countries aren't about to ignore or forget the U.S.' bullying even if some immediate threats are being delayed, while Deirdre Mitchell-MacLean comments on the warnings we've received against future reliance on the U.S. Crawford Kilian's proposed resistance against Trump's extortion includes building closer international ties while treating collaborators' brands as toxic. Paul Wells makes the case for applying our own tariffs rather than letting Trump continue to make threats with apparent impunity. And Heather McPherson discusses what a principled and courageous foreign policy would properly include. 

- Finally, Gaby Hinsliff writes that no country can afford to appease or encourage a regime which is willing to wreck the world. And Andy Bounds reports on the EU's ability to target tech giants and intellectual property monopolies as part of an anti-coercion response. 

Tuesday Night Cat Blogging

Angled cat.

Tuesday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Brian Beutler makes the effort to classify the crises created by the new Trump administration as well as the available responses. Jeet Heer discusses Elon Musk's coup against crucial parts of the U.S. state., while Nathan Tankus goes into detail about the dangers of his control over payments and financial information through the Treasury. And David Dayen reports on the shutdown of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for the offence of giving people a fighting chance against corporate abuses. 

- A.R. Moxon writes that any organized response will need to start at the popular level as the government apparatus is rendered incapable of responding to anything other than Donald Trump's fascist diktats, while the opposition in Congress refuses to meaningfully oppose an authoritarian regime. Jonathan Last points out the role money can play in forcing Trump's hand at times - with his reversal on tariffs against Canada in the wake of financial upheaval looking like an important example. 

- Seth Klein notes that any further threats against Canada will demand a response based on the U.S.' reliance on fossil fuels. And Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood and Marc Lee offer some additional creative suggestions.  

- Alex Himelfarb discusses how the conflation of austerity with "common sense" results in a meaner and less responsive form of politics. And Emma Paling examines the programs which are at the most risk if Pierre Poilievre ever gets the chance to impose his version on Canada. 

- Finally, Jen St. Denis talks to Avi Lewis about the prospect of a government that serves the interests of the general public - including by ending the sense of powerlessness that comes from leaving the availability of housing and basic necessities to corporate interests.

On guardrails

There seems to be a general (and rightful) consensus that Elon Musk's demand to eliminate all regulations as a baseline position is high on the list of his unauthorized plans, based solely on libertarian fervour and wilful ignorance, which stand to create catastrophic risks for the American public. 

But if we recognize that compulsive deregulation is one of the most obvious and dangerous symptoms of antisocial corporatist disease, shouldn't we also recognize that it's worth defending our governments' ability to enact protections in the public interest - rather than using Trump's administration as an excuse to subject ourselves to the same type of presumption that all regulations should be invalid in Canada? 

Update: See more from Chris Roberts and Stuart Trew, as well as Dougald Lamont. 

[Edit: fixed wording.]

Monday Morning Links

Assorted content to start your week.

- Jessica Wildfire discusses how the Trump/Musk administration is meeting or exceeding the most damning predictions, while Ian Dunt points out the similar pattern following from Brexit as the same anti-social right undermined the public interest in the UK. Timothy Snyder writes about the effects of government based on the logic of destruction, while Taya Graham interviews Stephen Janis about the acceleration of the U.S.' decline already in progress. And Ezra Klein highlights the dangers of trusting Trump's false claims to dictatorial authority, while Thom Hartmann rightly calls out the seizure of invented power as a form of treason.  

- Alex Kirshner interviews Ed Zitron about the dystopian future we'll face if tech tycoons get their way.  Caleb Ecarma and Judd Legum report on the pillaging of Americans' personal information in government data banks by Elon Musk and his incel cultists, while Mike Masnick notes that Musk is following the playbook which destroyed Twitter in dealing with the U.S.' state apparatus. 

- Stephen Marche writes that Trump's threats to conquer Canada will come to nothing (at least as long as we don't let his apologists dictate our response), while David Moscrop comments on the type of nationalism which will best defend Canada's identity as a country capable of recognizing and improving upon its own failings. Adam King argues that the lesson to be drawn from Trump is to confirm the longstanding need to become less tied to the U.S. Blayne Haggart notes that nothing that happens with the current round of tariffs will change the reality that the U.S. is an unreliable actor, while Stewart Prest sets out some principles to deal with that lack of trust and credibility (including the need for other countries to work together). Jennifer Robson discusses how the public response to the COVID-19 pandemic offers lessons in how to structure supports in the wake of a tariff war, with a key consideration being to support workers' livelihood rather than to funnel money to businesses. And in another analogy to the pandemic, Nora Loreto offers a warning that we can fully expect unscrupulous businesses to profiteer off of the imposition of tariffs. 

- Luke LeBrun reports on the labour movement's call to hit back hard against Trump's attack on Canada, while the Climate Action Network sets out a civil society response looking to put people first and build resilience. Taylor Noakes discusses how Canada's long-term defence is best served by investing in a climate army. And Evan Scrimshaw notes that the corruption of the Trump regime sets up opportunities for a targeted response against his cronies. 

- Finally, Lois Ross discusses how the Libs have chosen to allow for still more concentration of wealth and power in the agricultural sector through a corporate merger. And Maura Forrest reports on new research showing that Canadian preschoolers get more than half of their calorie intake from ultra-processed foods.