Eric Van Rythoven

Two, and I think Jen's post touches on this, is that successful cons often reveal our ideological desires. Trump's con reveals that there is a desire for cruelty, for ethnic cleansing, and antidemocratic politics.

People know that those desires are ugly and don't want to own up to them. /3

Cooling out the mark requires calming them down and helping them confront the pain and anguish that they've been duped.

In Trump's America, it's all scandals and atrocities that are emotional draining. After resistance & solidarity, there is very little left for comforting Trump's dupes /2

This is a *really* good take on Trump supporters, Goffman's classic account of the con man, and the problem of 'cooling out' Trump supporters.

I have two quick thoughts. One is that I think the reason there is no one to 'cool out' Trump supporters is that this requires emotional labour... /1

Tonight I watched Prime Minister Mark Carney take the actual Heated Rivalry Canada fleece from Hudson Williams, slip it on and say: “This is true soft power.”

So...not close at all?

This is a really good essay.

Congratulations, looks great!

© CBC/Radio-Canada 2026. All rights reserved.

I did some radio with CBC on the international politics of the Grok controversy and Canada's response.

Come for the incisive analysis, stay to hear my kids yelling at the dog for peeing on the carpet.

www.cbc.ca/listen/live-...

Oh my god this is so horrifying... this is the most despicable gaslighting imaginable - tech executives must be held responsible for what they create.

I would also note: X has deleted a handful of these images. But the vast majority of them remain live on X today.

Wow, what a catastrophically bad take, one of the worst I've seen in years.

Like I just can't imagine the sheer embarrassment of take so bad. It's like they made this in a lab...

Yes!

But Trump also probably realized he needed an off ramp and Rutte gave him one.

Second, concerted opposition from governments and publics are an effective tool to force Trump to back down.

This administration is politically very weak at home, and doesn't want to face any costs abroad.

Post script: I think that this episode shows two things.

First, the guardrails on this Presidency are even weaker than we probably think. The United States just immolated its reputation and got nothing in return.

As this was went to press, Trump climbed down from his threats and agreed to a 'Framework' deal on Greenland.

It's hard to see this as anything other than an embarrassing climbdown for Trump, who just a week ago claimed the U.S. would have Greenland "one way or another"

4) EU retaliation and boycott

The EU is the #1 export market for US goods and services. As Trump became more serious, markets have started to price in the costs of another conflict--and the Trump admin simply cannot afford it.

3) The European Tripwire

Even a small presence of EU troops defending the island dramatically raised the costs of simply invading. This admin doesn't like to pay costs for anything.

2) Republican defections

More than anyone other issue, House and Senate Republicans broke from Trump on this. Some even floated impeachment.

I make four arguments for why Trump's annexation likely won't succeed.

1) The polling is absolutely terrible.
Diplomatic talks failed, and simply buying the territory is a non-starter. This left military force, but this polls in the 4%-9% range. This is why Trump walked back use of force today.

Trump’s annexation of Greenland seemed imminent. Now it’s on much shakier ground. The stain of Donald Trump’s constant bullying of American allies will linger long after his administration is gone.

I wrote about the collapse of Trump's plan to annex Greenland 1/

Can I also recommend Everett C. Hughes classic "Dirty Work and Good People"?

It examines how everyday Germans became morally contaminated by the 'dirty work' of the Nazis. Really interesting take on the collective transmission of stigma in society.

www.jstor.org/stable/79940...

'Canada lives because of the U.S.,' Trump says while jabbing Carney | CBC News U.S. President Donald Trump claimed Wednesday Canada owes its continued existence to the United States while calling out Prime Minister Mark Carney for delivering a speech that condemned coercion by g...

Mark Carney: The Great Powers are becoming more aggressive.

*five minutes later*

Donald Trump: WE COULD KILL YOU RIGHT NOW.

www.cbc.ca/news/politic...

Military models Canadian response to hypothetical American invasion By Robert Fife, Gavin John

Canada does not have the number of military personnel or the sophisticated equipment needed to fend off a conventional American attack, they said. So, the military envisions unconventional warfare in which small groups of irregular military or armed civilians would resort to ambushes, sabotage, drone warfare or hit-and-run tactics. One of the officials said the model includes tactics used by the Afghan mujahedeen in their hit-and-run attacks on Russian soldiers during the 1979-1989 Soviet-Afghan War. These were the same tactics employed by the Taliban in their 20-year war against the U.S. and allied forces that included Canada. Many of the 158 Canadian soldiers killed in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2014 were struck by improvised explosive devices or IEDs. The aim of such tactics would be to impose mass casualties on U.S. occupying forces, the official said. The aim of such tactics would be to impose mass casualties on U.S. occupying forces, the official said.

Conscription has been ruled out for now, but the level of sacrifice that would be asked of Canadians remains a central topic, the officials said. General Jennie Carignan, Chief of the Defence Staff, has already announced her intention to create a 400,000-plus-strong reserve force of volunteers. The officials said they could be armed or asked to provide disruptions if the U.S. becomes an occupying power. A senior Defence Department official said Canada would have a maximum of three months to prepare for a land and sea invasion. The first indications that invasion orders had been sent would be expected to come from U.S. military warnings that Canada no longer has a shared skies policy with the United States, the source said. This rupture in the joint defence agreement would likely see France or Britain, nuclear-weapon states, being called on to provide support and defence for Canada against the U.S.

Globe & Mail reporting on Canadian military's modelling of how an extended insurgency against a US invasion would play out:

In short, we'd take cues from the mujahideen.

"The aim of such tactics would be to impose mass casualties on U.S. occupying forces..."

For Canadians this should sink any hope for a deal with the US.

The EU relented and accepted a brutally one-sided deal, and before the ink is even dry Trump has already reneged on the agreement.

Trying to write a piece on the US annexation of Greenland, and everything feels so monumentally stupid I don't even think I can finish.

This is pretty good.

Re-upping for the morning crowd

“There are compelling reasons, then, for why Canada has been slow to act amid the global backlash to Grok. But are these good reasons? No.”
@ericvanr.bsky.social nails it.

Thanks Blayne!