Seeking to appease an authoritarian by anticipating their wants merely conditions us for more and greater concessions
Published Dec 26, 2024 • Last updated 19 hours ago • 3 minute read
You can save this article by registering for free here. Or sign-in if you have an account.
President-elect Donald Trump speaks at meeting of the House GOP conference, Nov. 13, 2024, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)
Article content
By: Robin Baranyai
A lot has happened since historian Timothy Snyder published his concise handbook, On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century.
The tiny book exploded in 2017. Today it’s more relevant than ever. Among the lessons Snyder draws from our fraught history with authoritarianism, the most important is: Do not obey in advance.
So far, we’re doing a terrible job.
Advertisement 2
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY
Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.
Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account.
Get exclusive access to the Windsor Star ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on.
Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists.
Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists.
Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.
SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.
Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account.
Get exclusive access to the Windsor Star ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on.
Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists.
Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists.
Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.
REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
Access articles from across Canada with one account.
Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments.
Enjoy additional articles per month.
Get email updates from your favourite authors.
THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK.
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
Access articles from across Canada with one account
Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments
Enjoy additional articles per month
Get email updates from your favourite authors
Sign In or Create an Account
or
Article content
When wealthy U.S. newspaper owners decided not to endorse a 2024 presidential candidate, they were obeying in advance — avoiding the ire of a grudge-holding nominee, in case he returned to power — thus making it more likely he would.
Seeking to appease an authoritarian by anticipating what he might want, and offering it before he asks, merely conditions us for more and greater concessions, Snyder warns. U.S. senators who have pledged to support dangerously unqualified cabinet picks, long before confirmation hearings, are simply laying bare their obsequence.
Appallingly, we’re doing the same thing in Canada.
A conga line of anticipatory obedience greeted the president-elect’s threat of a 25 per cent tariff on Canadian imports, which he threatened as retaliation against the “invasion” of fentanyl and “illegal aliens.” Ontario Premier Doug Ford was first in line with a preemptive sacrifice, proposing to cut Mexico out of the Canada-U.S.-Mexico-Agreement. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith promptly lined up behind him.
The premiers’ clunky attempts to curry favour only show the once- and future president how easily he can push us around. More on point was Mexico’s former chief free trade negotiator Kenneth Smith Ramos, who told CBC’s Power and Politics, killing the trilateral deal would just play into the hands of a leader whose consistent approach to his trading partners is “dividing and conquer.”
Advertisement 3
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Meanwhile, federally, Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre made up a new podium sign with the toadying slogan “fix the broken border.” His new rhetorical target, “people who lie to come into our country” (while claiming to love “real” refugees), echoes the exaggerations and deflections of the president-elect. Such eagerness to obey in advance rather takes the air out of his criticism the prime minister returned from dinner at Mar-a-Lago without winning any concessions.
Plans for the visit, proposed by Trudeau, were hatched quietly behind the scenes. The leaders’ dinner conversation touched on trade, border security and shared concern over fentanyl, along with a joke about Canada becoming the “fifty-first state.” Ha, ha.
Even less amusingly, on Nov. 29 — the same day Trudeau and Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc quietly flew to Florida — Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) announced an immediate “pause” on the private sponsorship of refugees. Claims already submitted will progress through the queue; however, no new sponsorship applications by community groups or groups of five will be accepted until after Dec. 31, 2025.
Advertisement 4
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Of course, this could be a coincidence. IRCC did not cite a change in American leadership as a reason for the change. Rather, it referred to the backlog of applications from private sponsors, which, not surprisingly, exceed the shrinking targets set out in Canada’s immigration levels plan.
Still, one wonders why it had to happen so abruptly, extinguishing hope for vulnerable refugees, along with groups of Canadians tirelessly pursuing legal channels to help them to safety. IRCC could have tapered the flow of applications, or given private sponsors a 48-hour window to submit paperwork near completion (as it has done in the past), but the pause was declared effective as of midnight the day before.
Another factor in the decision, IRCC noted, was “stakeholder feedback on potential application intake controls.” It could be unrelated, but it sure sounds perilously close to obeying in advance.
Robin Baranyai’s columns are regularly featured in Postmedia News publications. She can be reached at [email protected].
Recommended from Editorial
Baranyai: Too often, consequences mistaken for censorship
Baranyai: Canada plays role in giving Afghan women hope