Carney's Davos Speech Sparks Wave of Sycophantic Coverage
Empty words electrify groveling coverage
A speech by Prime Minister Mark Carney at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland has become a lightning rod for self-congratulatory nationalism. This is thanks in no small part to news organizations, who have perpetuated this simpering attitude almost uniformly.
Carney's speech has been covered for the direct way he addressed the seeming end of American hegemony and the international rules-based order. Central to his point was the essay of Czech anticommunist Václav Havel, "The Power of the Powerless," in which he describes a shop owner placing a sign in the window signalling that he agrees with the social hegemony of the USSR, whether the beliefs are true or not. Even in a first year political science course, I found this essay to be trite and not specific to any system. Yet Carney adheres to this principle like dogma.
Curiously, Carney admits that this post-WWII order based on liberty and international law was the shop sign we all knew to be a lie. "This fiction was useful," Carney proclaimed, going on to say that accommodating a more powerful hegemony is not sovereignty. "It's the performance of sovereignty," he explained. "While accepting subordination." These are points that have been made by left-wing activists for decades.
His speech was undoubtedly powerful. It hit a lot of true and important notes. However, they were mere words. Carney is a banker and dyed-in-the-wool neoliberal, his comments may have been accurate, but his solutions reinforce the system that led to this "rupture." Look no further than the Canadian achievements he boasted: critical mineral extraction, AI investment, doubling defence spending. All of these are major goals of the US, which he hoped to distinguish from. Consider the environment in which he gave this speech, the World Economic Forum, a platform for investment. This speech was an ad, carefully crafted to extract as much capital and attention as possible.
Feeling deep national pride in Carney's speech is therefore equivalent to feeling similarly in a Tim Horton's commercial.
Regardless, Carney's speech has been lauded across the country. In a wave of teary-eyed coverage that beats the national drum for Canada, our news media became blubbering piles of worship. At most, the criticism is lack of detail on how Carney plans to implement his goals.
Though every major outlet praised Carney, none seem more sycophantic than CTV News. Panelists featured on Power Play gushed about the Prime Minister's speech. When considering the "reality of the situation," Vassy Kapelos only referred to the ramifications in making this speech before facing US President Trump. Not considered as "reality" was Canada's actual position on these matters.
Kathleen Monk called the speech "So clear-eyed, so forceful, in many ways brave... to learn actually from reporting that Prime Minister Carney himself penned this? Remarkable." It was as though his words were handed down by the speech-writing gods. Shakir Chambers, glowingly, said that he saw a "sales pitch for Canada" but tempered his expectations with wanting investment into the country. "I think this was Mark Carney at his best," said Dan Moulton of Crestview Strategy. The most disapproval came from Laura stone of The Globe and Mail, who said "I found it a little bit esoteric." A critique that couldn't be more vapid.
Sharan Kaur, who served as deputy chief of staff for former Liberal finance minister Bill Morneau, continued the unabashed flattery. She wrote in a CTV News article that Carney's speech marked the "end to Canada's era of American Subordination."
Kaur went on to grovel breathlessly about the magnetism of Carney. "He didn’t just walk into the room; he commanded it, delivering what may be the most consequential speech of our time," she wrote, presumably while kicking her feet and giggling. "Canada has taken the sign down, and for the first time in a generation, the world is looking at us with a new kind of respect."
Scott Martin
Meanwhile, The Globe and Mail published a schmoozing article by columnist John Turley-Ewart, who trilled about the ability of business to help Carney's idea of economic sovereignty. Most importantly, "the Prime Minister gave Canadians what many have sought for a decade or more – a clear national purpose." In another piece the author lauded Carney's call for "resistance" in more sombre, but still approving, terms. "It is categorically not the way Canadian prime ministers speak on the world stage. At least, it has not been, not in the old world order."
Even the National Post published articles praising Carney's speech. One cited it as the end of "Liberal preening and pretence." Echoing hollow criticism as the speech being empty of action, another begrudgingly declared Carney's speech at Davos better than Trudeau's.
On a CBC News Power and Politics panel, independent Senator Peter Boehm called it "the most consequential speech by a Canadian Prime Minister since Louis St. Laurent in 1947." The other panelist agreed. "It's putting Canada at the centre as a leader," said Louise Blais, former representative to the UN.
In a continuing show of worship, articles from CTV News, Toronto Star and CBC News collected praising coverage and opinions from world leaders or publications on Carney's speech. Multiple outlets published the full transcript of the speech, including CBC News, National Post, The Globe and Mail, and Global News.
In this wave of coverage, critical voices have been minimized or reduced to an attitude of "wait and see" if Carney can deliver.
Much of this cheerleading nonsense rests on the belief that Carney has finally come to terms with reality. In reality, his words, even if accurate, are worse than empty. They're lies. All this coverage omits the fact that Canada has been a key partner in perpetuating the Palestinian genocide. Despite being possibly the biggest event revealing the false promise of international order, Carney's bloody hands receive endless praise. In terms of defending sovereignty, Carney has repeatedly violated principles of free, prior and informed consent regarding Indigenous nations, for the purposes of energy extraction. These goals are similarly what lead Trump to target Venezuela and Greenland. Carney himself is interested to join Trump's ludicrous Golden Dome project. No examination of this ideology, or its incoherence in practice, is present in any of the coverage mentioned here.
Recently, an article in The Tyee referred to the Bandung Conference and the Non-Aligned Movement to justify a new NATO type organization. Debunking and dissecting that argument also applies to Carney's approach. As I wrote, "Central to this argument is the belief in expanded Canadian militarism, without any examination of Canada's role in perpetuating and benefiting from colonization, both on this land and across the world." True to form, Carney accepted Trump's offer to join his "Board of Peace" to govern Gaza. This new organization is a naked attempt to undermine the UN Security Council on Trump's terms.
It's shocking that Canada, with all of its gleeful participation in US colonial and empire-building post-WWII, would hope to appropriate attempts of Third World countries to distinguish themselves from Great Powers. The arrogance is astonishing. Moreover, the unquestioned praise lauded onto Carney for his speech shows a complete foundational lack of critical coverage in legacy news. We deserve better, but, if this is any indication, we will not be getting it. You are not immune to propaganda.
Comments ()