The End of Business as Usual

Feb 28

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
- William Butler Yeats, The Second Coming

Unlike Yeats, I fear business as usual more than anarchy. I do not want the centre to hold, and certainly not the centre the esteemed poet longed for. Sometimes we need to decentralize and encourage other centres to proliferate. Things falling apart can portend doom, but it can also presage regeneration, allowing new possibilities to emerge amid the ruins. Many of the most inspiring chapters in modern history consist of marginalized people accepting Cura's gift, finding power in their shared experience of insecurity to challenge an entrenched and oppressive status quo.
- Astra Taylor, The Age of Insecurity

We are in a time of profound change and upheaval. A confluence of long-term global crises and malicious actors has upended any semblance of normality. We need to understand this crisis for what it is and meet this moment.

There are too many people “sanewashing” what is happening in the USA under Trump and Musk. Too many are willing to “applaud their attempts to do something about bureaucratic bloat and inefficiency” — completely missing the substance of what is happening in the United States.

We need to be clear about what is going on. Professor Christina Pagel has analyzed the Trump administration’s actions over its first few weeks. She paints a vivid picture of an emerging proto-authoritarian state. Pagel fits over 70 actions into five broad authoritarian domains:

Undermining Democratic Institutions & Rule of Law; Dismantling federal government
Dismantling Social Protections & Rights; Enrichment & Corruption
Suppressing Dissent & Controlling Information
Attacking Science, Environment, Health, Arts & Education
Aggressive Foreign Policy & Global Destabilization

As Pagel argues, “Seeing the actions of the last three weeks as a whole, with signs of escalation in the coming weeks, it surely cannot be denied that the US is progressing rapidly along the path to an authoritarian regime, most at ease dealing with other autocracies.”

Diving into Data & Decision making

"So this is how liberty dies… " Making sense of Trump's first three weeks

The gravity of this should not be understated. For Pagel, “Before you can act on a crisis you have to recognise you are in one”. David Moscrop has recently made the same point, that we need to call this what it is:

We must tell the truth by using true words to describe what we see, to explain what we are living through.
Using true words requires us to understand what these words mean, and to accept that the horrors we’ve read about in history books or in stories about far-flung places we’ve never thought of visiting are happening much closer to home and in real-time.

Those true words include that we are witnessing an attempted authoritarian coup happen in real time to our closest neighbour and trading partner. That the United States now stands lockstep with dictators, not democracies, that its President is openly advocating for America to perpetrate a genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza, and that Trump plans to use economic coercion to secure Canada’s annexation.

These are big, scary truths. And amid a context of Trump, Musk and co. “flooding the zone with shit,” it can be utterly overwhelming and demoralizing.

We need to recognize this is a crisis and respond accordingly. Sanewashing what is going on, assuming that some kind of lasting deal can be struck, or adopting a managerial, steady-as-she-goes approach won’t cut it.

How we think about policymaking needs to change, rapidly.

No matter what area of policy, the underpinning assumptions that have guided decision-making for decades are under question. Trade, innovation, economic growth, post-secondary education, immigration, taxation, intellectual property, defence, foreign policy. All and more are impacted by an authoritarian, unpredictable and expansionist United States armed with the world’s largest economy and military.

We have to think deeply to understand what is happening and how we need to respond. This is especially true given that other challenges, such as inequality, climate change, technological transformation, and so on, have not gone away and are being exacerbated by the crisis in the US.

We need to be asking what all of this means for how we think about and approach policies relating to AI, to data sovereignty, to digital regulation, to research and science policy, to regional economic policy. We need to think about how we can respond while not losing sight of the need to still build towards a more prosperous and inclusive society and economy.

Thinking about policymaking through the lens of security could be a start. While the pioneering activist and reformer Jane Addams once argued that “any concern for defence and security was tantamount to accepting militarism and authoritarianism,” in the situation we face concern with security is essential for fighting authoritarianism.

But we should not be thinking of security through just a narrow lens. We should follow the advice of Astra Taylor from her excellent book The Age of Insecurity:

Political types like myself tend to talk far more about the principles of freedom, equality, and democracy than security, and I've come to believe this is a strategic mistake. Security, particularly the material security of reliable access to food, water, shelter, medical care, welfare, protection from violence, and a habitable environment, must be understood as foundational to freedom, equality, and democracy, not an afterthought. Contra Hobbes, freedom does not exist in opposition to security but, rather, is one of material security's most important rewards. The security of having our needs met allows us to have real autonomy and creative agency in the world.

In this time of crisis, we should be thinking of how different policies strengthen Canada’s security. Our security to exist as a state, yes. Our economic security to have an independent economy, for sure. But also how we give everyone in Canada the material security to flourish. We need to approach security holistically.

As Taylor wrote in the quote at the top of this piece, “Things falling apart can portend doom, but it can also presage regeneration, allowing new possibilities to emerge amid the ruins.” We cannot let ourselves be overwhelmed by events. We cannot think in silos, assuming that our little area of the policy world is not impacted or has no role in this wider tapestry of crisis. We need to actively grapple with what is in front of us.

We need to shape the future to leave us in a better place than where we started.

Reading Recommendations

Just a few pieces that fit into this theme. The first by Matthew Mendelsohn, CEO of Social Capital Partners — “Canadian foundations must invest more in Canada and invest for local impact”. Mendelsohn connects the dots between the threat we face, philanthropic capital, and the need to use that capital to provide the kind of material security to Canadian communities that Astra Taylor advocates for. As Mendelsohn argues: “Canada’s economy is being attacked, and our foundations sit on huge pools of capital. They need to do more to support Canadian communities at this time of geopolitical and economic threat.” This piece is part of a wider series of articles from SCP putting forward policy solutions to protect Canada’s sovereignty in ways that are “in the interests of works, smaller businesses and the vulnerable.” It is really great to see an organization understanding the magnitude of the moment and the need to respond in kind.

The second piece by Taylor Noakes in The Maple looks at Canadian trade policy - “Time To Think Beyond ‘Worthless’ Free Trade Agreements: Economists.” In it, Jim Stanford makes the case that Trump has shown that FTAs aren’t “worth the paper it’s written on.” While Trump might be railing against FTAs, the reality is that the global trading system has been built in a way that serves American interests foremost - a view that unites both left-wing economists like Stanford as well as billionaires like Jim Balsillie, a self-proclaimed “economic nationalist.” As I’ve previously argued, we’re too small a country to ever realistically be self-sufficient, but that doesn’t mean we don’t need to shake off the assumption that free trade in the form we’ve seen over recent decades works for Canada and respond in new ways.

Finally, a piece by Joe Castaldo in The Globe and Mail — “Changing U.S. relationship has thrust Canada’s data sovereignty into the spotlight.” As Castaldo explores, previously unthinkable scenarios are now real possibilities, such as the United States imposing export controls on GPUs, harming Canada’s AI ambitions, or “a scenario in which the White House directs cloud providers to stop servicing Canadian clients, wreaking havoc on operations.” Another area we need to update our thinking and change our policy approaches urgently to meet the moment.