Is Carney repeating his mistakes from the UK? Backing BRICS could lead to serious consequences скачать в хорошем качестве

Is Carney repeating his mistakes from the UK? Backing BRICS could lead to serious consequences

Jim and Iain lambast Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s visit to Beijing as a baffling geopolitical pivot, forcing Canadians into a perceived choice between aligning with authoritarian powers such as China, Russia, Qatar, and Hamas, or standing with democratic allies like the United States. They denounce the “new world order” rhetoric and Carney’s comments on Greenland’s sovereignty as gratuitous insults to the U.S., particularly in light of Trump’s warnings about BRICS countries undermining the U.S. dollar’s dominance, which is reinforced by America’s military strength, fossil fuel self-sufficiency, geography, and technological superiority. Critics of these deepening ties highlight what they see as ignored Chinese atrocities: more than 2 million Uyghurs in forced labor camps, executions and kidnappings of Canadians (including issues tied to the Meng Wanzhou affair), election interference (such as a reported $1 million bounty on a candidate), and the operation of secret Chinese police stations on Canadian soil. They argue that the Liberals’ moral posturing is hypocritical—vilifying Trump and Musk as “Nazis” while downplaying China’s alleged genocide and even floating proposals for joint security and policing operations with Beijing. Further scrutiny falls on proposed nuclear cooperation, including the possibility of China building or operating nuclear plants in Canada, which the hosts liken to the United Kingdom’s “golden era” missteps with China during Carney’s tenure at the Bank of England. They mock what they see as media spin: an Orwellian reversal that recasts China from a “security threat” into a “strategic partner.” Senator Yuen Pau Woo is cited as warning about “Sinophobia” and a new McCarthyism among critics, suggesting that opposition to the policy is rooted in “51st state thinking” and framed as sabotage of Canadian interests. The hosts urge Canada to “wake up” from what they call “virtue signaling” and TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome), insisting that the country should prioritize its relationship with the United States over risky deals with China that increase Canada’s strategic vulnerabilities. Overall, the dialogue portrays Carney’s diplomacy as inconsistent, sanctimonious, and dangerously deferential to Beijing, risking serious alienation from the U.S. without any coherent or credible strategic logic. Does Canada stand to lose more than it gains by alligning with China? Let us know what you think in the comments!