posted
I think my thing is that as the biggest, richest, loudest kid on the block, we have to accept that jokes are going to be made about us. To make jokes back, particularly about invading other countries when we're already infringing on their territorial rights, just lacks class. Gallows humor or not, it's crass. And if a Canadian wanted to make the same joke, I'd have no problem with it. They get to decide if it's funny or not. Just like I can call myself a b*&$% if I want to, and my very close female friends can as well, but if a stranger, someone I know casually, or almost any male friend called me that it would get them raised eyebrows and an icy stare until they apologized, at best.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
America deserves anything anyone says about it. If they weren't hicks, then the rest of the world wouldn't hate them.
Posts: 78 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bringing them up to hurt, or to derail a serious thread about the US impinging upon Canada is perhaps a bit diminuitive.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Exactly, fugu. "Hey, you just found out we're dropping stuff in your waters and possibly on your citizens, with less than a weeks notice, there's absolutely nothing you can do about it, and we're going to make fun of you, too!" Nothing like rubbing a little salt in the wounds.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fugu, I wasn't talking about the jokes, either. I was saying that even though the discourse between nations is usually polite to a fault, that does not mean that courtesy and friendship are the way things are really done. It's all quid pro quo is what I mean, which is not necessarily friendship.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:we have to accept that jokes are going to be made about us. To make jokes back, particularly about invading other countries when we're already infringing on their territorial rights, just lacks class.
The jokes back lack exactly as much class as the initial jokes.
posted
I don't think politeness equals friendship, but long term relations cannot proceed without politeness, and short term relationships are jeopardized without it. Merely because the actual tradeoffs involve quid pro quos does not mean the framework for negotiating those does not rest on politeness.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yep. And I like to think that if I were a citizen of another nation, I wouldn't be making the intial jokes. But I'm not, and can only control my actions in the situation I'm in. And I'm a do unto others as you'd have done unto you type of girl.
posted
Which is ironic, considering the first jokes made in this thread were about 'imperial America'. America and the rest of the world are fortunate we are not in fact imperialistic, since things would be a good deal less pleasant than they are now if we were.
And sorry for continuing the derailment. I don't know what plans, if any, are made for charting air space and whatnot, actually. I suppose it's possible that the issue doesn't come up very often, since it's more likely debris lands in no one's territorial waters or airspace. I do agree, though, that it is very bad form on our part not to have taken steps of courtesy first.
And Aaron...how exactly did America, the land of hateful hicks, become the most diverse, powerful, and wealthiest nation on Earth? Got lucky at the track?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: or almost any male friend called me that it would get them raised eyebrows and an icy stare until they apologized, at best.
Typical irrational women.
Stop being so odd! You want to seem like ball-busters, we get it, it's cute, now get over it. Get the hell back in the kitchen and stop complaining about the mud I leave on the floor when I walk in!
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:The jokes back lack exactly as much class as the initial jokes.
To mix two old and blatantly sexist proverbs, it is incumbent upon the man with the biggest stick to be the biggest man.
"You make fun of us too!" Well, yeah, we do, but we are not screwing you on trade, for starters. Play by the rules you helped to draft and then we'll talk about playing nice.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
America has in the recent past consistently treated Canada very shabbily in a significant number of ways. We have not, and are not responding in kind, and have instead pursued the appropriate legal avenues. Every single ruling has been in our favour, but America has not changed its policy.
This business of flight paths is another example of how America takes Canada for granted, and frankly I don't care to listen to whining about how you guys are the butt of whoever else's jokes while you are screwing us in real, fiscally substantive ways in addition to being inconsiderate in how you conduct your affairs with respect to us.
Yes, I think jokes about Canada's military are tired and unfunny. You'll also notice that I did not bring them up, because that is at best tangentially related to my point, but simply put: why should we like you, or even say nice things about you, when you treat us badly?
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey twink, the people on this board aren't doing jack shit to Canada, why are you holding them responsible?
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I noted that, Dagonee. But I also noted that no Canadians made any jokes at all for the first 35 or so posts, and Americans continued making jokes even though several Canadians had stated that they weren't finding the situation particularly humorous, and were in fact seemed to be politely saying that they found the jokes offensive. And while I have seen the main Canadian posters in this thread make statements of concern about the US before, which have included some heavy sarcasm, I can't recall seeing any of them "making jokes" about us. So to say that Canadians make fun of us is true, but it is also somewhat disingenuous, unless you can point to these particular Canadians making fun of us on this forum.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, you're getting annoyed over the jokes they've made about Canada because of things none of them have done to Canada.
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:This business of flight paths is another example of how America takes Canada for granted, and frankly I don't care to listen to whining about how you guys are the butt of whoever else's jokes while you are screwing us in real, fiscally substantive ways in addition to being inconsiderate in how you conduct your affairs with respect to us.
That you categorize pointing out that bad jokes about other countries are equally classless as "whining" shows just how unreasonable you're being.
Further, your categorization of the trade disputes is incredibly one-sided. There is a review process in place, and it will determine the outcome. Until then, both sides have colorable legal arguments backing them up. Your failure to even mention the other side makes it clear you're more interested in nursing hurt feelings than reaching any kind of understanding.
Your equation of the two issues of jokes and trade disputes is, frankly, demeaning you. The jokes made by Canadians don't possess any more class because the U.S. has invoked substantive penalties subject to due process with respect to softwood lumber imports. Just as jokes made by Americans don't possess any more class because of jokes made by Canadians.
posted
I'm dropping this topic, because as twinky just noted it's not the main point of the thread, just a little pet peeve of mine. (The joke thing.) So I'm done derailing, and hope some constructive conversation can happen on the original thread topic.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
ElJay, I was disagreeing with a general proposition you put forth: "I think my thing is that as the biggest, richest, loudest kid on the block, we have to accept that jokes are going to be made about us. To make jokes back, particularly about invading other countries when we're already infringing on their territorial rights, just lacks class." What was done in this thread is irrelevant to that proposition.
posted
*I* didn't bring up jokes. They are not related to the point I'm trying to make. But people seem hell-bent on talking about them, so I've tried to address them, too.
quote:Further, your categorization of the trade disputes is incredibly one-sided. There is a review process in place, and it will determine the outcome. Until then, both sides have colorable legal arguments backing them up. Your failure to even mention the other side makes it clear you're more interested in nursing hurt feelings than reaching any kind of understanding.
The review process is over in some cases, with ostensibly final rulings in, and no changes have been made. How is that "one-sided?" I think you're projecting what you want me to think onto my posts.
quote:Your equation of the two issues of jokes and trade disputes is, frankly, demeaning you.
I haven't done this. I see where you're getting it from, though, so I'll point out that my "playing nice" comment wasn't about jokes, I meant it in diplomatic terms (like the example I'm talking about in the initial post with the rockets).
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:frankly I don't care to listen to whining about how you guys are the butt of whoever else's jokes while you are screwing us in real, fiscally substantive ways
Equating may be the wrong word, but connecting them certainly isn't too strong, and is unreasonable.
Maybe jokes about U.S. trade policy would be connected.
quote:The review process is over in some cases, with ostensibly final rulings in, and no changes have been made. How is that "one-sided?" I think you're projecting what you want me to think onto my posts.
The review process is over for some and not for others. There are several pending, without final decisions. There are several cases that have gone against Canada. There are other countries opposing Canada's trade practices with them. To categorize it as the U.S. "screwing" Canada with no mention that Canada has not been innocent on trade over the last 3 years is misleading.
quote:frankly I don't care to listen to whining about how you guys are the butt of whoever else's jokes while you are screwing us in real, fiscally substantive ways
I was (and am) frustrated, because at the bottom of page one it looked like the thread was actually getting started. I wanted to talk about the "real, fiscally substantive" issues, as well as the strained diplomatic relations, not jokes. I'm aware that threads on Hatrack almost never go where the thread starter intended, but that didn't stop me from getting frustrated about this one.
quote:The review process is over for some and not for others. There are several pending, without final decisions. There are several cases that have gone against Canada. There are other countries opposing Canada's trade practices with them. To categorize it as the U.S. "screwing" Canada with no mention that Canada has not been innocent on trade over the last 3 years is misleading.
I don't think it is, because of the relative magnitude (in dollars, relative to, say, GDP). Steel, softwood lumber, and beef, specifically, in recent memory, have hurt us significantly and you not so much.
Edit: Curses, I just missed my bus. Now I have to wait half an hour for the next one... *shakes fist*
posted
Permit me to point out that I am an American and I am proud of my country. Granted, I have mixed opinions about the current administration, but my feelings about my country have not changed.
I did make the off-hand comment about "Imperial America" as a barbed observation about the tact, style and subtlety that currently dominate the Bush administration's foreign policy and, to a certain extent, his domestic agenda as well.
As for the joke material, perhaps I am a little south of the border, but I'm not aware of any actual Canadian jokes.
And yes, the amazingly short notice regarding the missile test can be interpreted a number of ways, from gross incompetence, arrogantly condescending attitude that we take Canadian approval for granted to an amazingly over sighted blunder in the planning phases of the operation.
posted
Political agitation against provincial and federal governments within Canada in an effort to change subsidy laws has, IIRC, happened here in the past.
And yes, "we don't do it as much as you do" is basically the crux of the matter. Is that invalid? When you impose tarrifs on us for some product, it's going to hurt us a lot more than it hurts you. If we impose retaliatory tarrifs it's the same, we are hurt more, economically than you are, because we export more to you than we import from you.
posted
Certainly. Would you, for instance, be mad because a mugger pressed his advantage (due to possession of a gun) in a situation involving you?
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are very serious and potentially legitimate complaints (I don't know enough trade law to judge the merits) about Canadian subsidies. These are not retaliatory subsidies, they are normal policy. The U.S. has the right to avail themselves of the agreed-upon process to account for them.
I don't know which WTO rulings are being ignored right now besides the one distributing reatliatory tarrifs to businesses. Note that the tarrifs themselves were upheld, just not the distribution.
I'm not saying there aren't others, and if the U.S. is ignoring them then it's wrong. But the U.S. wins an awful lot in the WTO, which is pretty much proof they aren't the only guilty ones.
And Canada is one of the guilty ones, at least sometimes.
So the real analogy is the mugger with the knife being annoyed when his would-be victim pulls a gun and takes more than the mugger stole originally.
posted
Perhaps I'm a little more jaded about life than most.
I expect a mugger or someone else to better themselves or their situation with little or no thought to my well-being.
If someone is going to mug me, using the current example, I expect him (using a generic, sexist assumption) to be armed. This was never intended as an exercise in fair play. Granted, I'd rather not be mugged but if I was the one doing the mugging, I'd tilt the odds in my favor as much as I could.
Continuing this example, I hope that mugger never has to appeal to my compassion or sympathy. And God forbid he asks me for a job.
Do I think the US policy of plying its advantage and squeezing is the best, long-term plan possible? No because I favor maintaining a semblence of cordial relations, but then I'm also not the person in charge.
posted
Mine wasn't an analogy, because it would be awful at that (as would yours), it was a situation highlighting a problem with an implication in TMedina's comment.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: If someone is going to mug me, using the current example, I expect him (using a generic, sexist assumption) to be armed. This was never intended as an exercise in fair play. Granted, I'd rather not be mugged but if I was the one doing the mugging, I'd tilt the odds in my favor as much as I could.
quote:Mine wasn't an analogy, because it would be awful at that (as would yours), it was a situation highlighting a problem with an implication in TMedina's comment.
But your highlighting of that problem ignored the fact that there were two muggers involved, not one. It's not simply taking advantage of, it's taking more advantage than the other guilty party that's happening.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:And Aaron...how exactly did America, the land of hateful hicks, become the most diverse, powerful, and wealthiest nation on Earth? Got lucky at the track?
Well, you're certainly NOT the most diverse country, so we'll have to add most conceded to the list there.
Also, powerful, yes - but give China 10 years. Your economy has slowed to a crawl, and other countries are quickly expanding. I wouldn't be too mouthy about your economic power.
And your right - you have most of the richest people on the planet. Of course, the top 250 richest people have the same amount of money as the poorest 2.5 billion people. Should you be proud of your wealth, or should you be ashamed of your gluttony? This, of course, is not just America. Canada doesn't do nearly as much as it should to help with poverty around the world.
Posts: 78 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
We aren't the most diverse nation? Name one that is more so, that also has as much acceptance and embraces so many cultures, please-one that isn't either heavily American-influenced OR heavily protected by America.
Slowed to a crawl? Our GDP still grows-at a higher rate than most nations on Earth. China's economy grows in large part due to ruthless control over its economy, and blatant violation of little things like trademarks and copyrights.
So, as much as it would gratify your smug superiority to see those things happen, they show no signs of doing so:)
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:There are very serious and potentially legitimate complaints (I don't know enough trade law to judge the merits) about Canadian subsidies. These are not retaliatory subsidies, they are normal policy. The U.S. has the right to avail themselves of the agreed-upon process to account for them.
You're referencing the grain subsidy dispute, right? Because there have been subsidy disputes both ways, IIRC, but the current biggest one in which you are complaining about us is the grain subsidy dispute. I think, though, that it's the only such complaint. We have both more formal complaints and more informal grievances (like the beef ban).
quote:I don't know which WTO rulings are being ignored right now besides the one distributing reatliatory tarrifs to businesses. Note that the tarrifs themselves were upheld, just not the distribution.
Softwood lumber is one example. Here is a chronology of events courtesy of the BC forestry department. It's actually similar to what happened with steel, because both were affected by the U.S. "anti-dumping" legislation (legislation that the WTO has ruled against in every dispute involving it, I believe).
quote:I'm not saying there aren't others, and if the U.S. is ignoring them then it's wrong. But the U.S. wins an awful lot in the WTO, which is pretty much proof they aren't the only guilty ones.
And Canada is one of the guilty ones, at least sometimes.
The WTO makes this information publically available to anyone who wants it, so we can have a look. This index displays disputes by country, while this one is by "issue." But whoo boy is there ever a lot of information there, written in very dense and dull language. And there are a LOT of complaints flying about every which way all around the world. But you can chart the life of, for instance, the softwood lumber dispute and the grain subsidy dispute with some "legwork." Of course, it helped me that I'd already found BC Forestry's summary of softwood lumber.
Don't, though. Trust me, it isn't fun, and you probably won't glean any genuinely useful information (at least, I didn't find much of anything useful apart from absolute numbers of complaints each way after much sifting). Though you'd probably find the reading easier than me, since it's all in legalese.
But, to reiterate my basic point: in recent years, America has consistently treated Canada poorly both diplomatically and trade-wise, and it isn't nice to do that to your biggest supplier of petrochemical products. That we (possibly, but let's say we ARE wrong for the sake of argument) have, in the grain subsidies case, been similary wrong, doesn't really make it okay.
The rocket thing is just another example. I hope that it isn't indicative of an institutional tendency to take Canada for granted, but I'm afraid (in the fearful sense, not the snooty sense) that it is.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dag: Except its not a metaphor, analogy, or anything of the sort. Its a counterexample.
TMedina's comment,
quote:So...you're mad because someone is pressing their advantage in a situation?
Seemed to imply that there is nothing wrong with pressing one's advantage in a situation. I pointed out a situation where it was very wrong to press advantage. That this situation has little bearing on the specific situation he was making a comment on is irrelevant. It still undermines the implicit notion, that its always okay to press an advantage.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:We aren't the most diverse nation? Name one that is more so, that also has as much acceptance and embraces so many cultures, please-one that isn't either heavily American-influenced OR heavily protected by America.
Slowed to a crawl? Our GDP still grows-at a higher rate than most nations on Earth. China's economy grows in large part due to ruthless control over its economy, and blatant violation of little things like trademarks and copyrights.
Rakeesh: Brazil.
As for China's economy, you don't think it has anything to do with their willingness to disregard good ecological policy, their massive manufacturing base, and the relative worth of their currency? (i really don't think the copyright & trademark issue is as big a deal as you or the RIAA are making it)
-------------------------------------------------
I have several points to make on the subject of US canadian relations particularly relating to the points brought up here.
From my particular vantage point (American dating a canadian), i've noted with growing dismay the sorts of treatment that Canada and Canadians receive when the bring up policy issues which effect and upset them. Almost without exception, the reaction returned from members of this board, the general public, the media and the bush admistration, begins by diminishing them as you would a child (That silly Canada, always getting their knickers in a twist about something, how endearing), and then immediately segues into americans lamenting how misunderstood they are by the world at large, and how we've done so much for them (as if that somehow addressed the substance of the original complaint). Finally, nothing is ultimately done, and the conversation peters out without so much as a second thought.
As an aside i'll just mention that like twink and many others have pointed out, on the face of it (and US/Canadian trade statistics), this is utterly absurd. My uncle put it to me this way in regards to Canada's seeming inability to get any attention in DC, "i don't know why canada doesn't just shut down the US/Canadian oil pipeline for 'maintanance'."
The way i see it, the problem that Canada has in communicating with the US precisely and identicallyreflects the sort of problem that takes place in interal US politics. It's not that Canada isn't listened to, it's that Americans generally are extremely adept at selective attention (intentionally or otherwise). And selective attention is present at every level of American Politics. Congressmen don't listen to people outside of their constitutency, and often, they won't go so far as to even to listen to the individuals in their constitutency (it's amazing how unwilling certain republican representatives in my state are to talk to their democratic constituents).
(i'll keep this short)
The problem Canada has is that all these factors work against it. Clearly they have no constituency in the US, moreover the treatment of Canadians as a group doesn't resonate in the US, unlike the treatment of Mexican Americans (since most americans think of them as USA light). On top of that, while Canada is extremely effective both in the realms of trade and international relationships, their distance (geographic and otherwise) from other players that the US is concerned about keeping pressure on, leads the US to treat Canadians as an afterthought if at all.
The comparison i would make is the difference between US/British and US/Canadian ties.
If the US political system were to change maybe other things would change too. I certainly hope both those things would happen.
[ April 10, 2005, 10:40 PM: Message edited by: Pod ]
Posts: 4482 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
But, in regards to the pipeline, i know they'd take it up the ass financially, but don't you think that the sort of hell that would break loose in the US would be orders of magnitude worse?
Posts: 4482 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Overfishing of Canadian territorial waters by American fishermen
The Portuguese do this, too. We should start mounting big guns on our Coast Guard ships or something. Of course, we also did a pretty good job of overfishing our own waters ourselves.
So... um, not that it's at all related, but are you and Jaiden cool with staying at the Crowne for the con?
Edit:
Re: Pipeline
Well, the other thing is that if more Americans (particularly but not exclusively politicians) realized just how crucial we are to America's supply of crude and petroleum products... honestly, I'm not sure what would happen. But I think there would be some pretty serious reactions, and it might not end well for us. It's a card I should hope we save until we're in genuinely dire straits.
posted
Well, few things are more likely to get me to post, like people complaining about America, and few things are more likely to get Ted to post than that, plus a mention of China to boot
And Brazil? I don't know much about Brazil, but I take your word for it. So America is not the most diverse nation on Earth, but I'd certainly put it up on the top ten, wouldn't you?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Yep. And I like to think that if I were a citizen of another nation, I wouldn't be making the intial jokes. But I'm not, and can only control my actions in the situation I'm in. And I'm a do unto others as you'd have done unto you type of girl.![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
(i really don't think the copyright & trademark issue is as big a deal as you or the RIAA are making it)![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
Of course, we also did a pretty good job of overfishing our own waters ourselves. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
