Comment by ImPostingOnHN | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ImPostingOnHN | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> Meanwhile, no shortage of announced Canadian intentions, in the first Trump administration and during the current trade war, to "target the red states" with tariffs to influence US politics, and no shortage of self-hating American Redditors cheering this on because Trump = bad, so anything that other countries do against the US = good.

Yes, meanwhile something completely different happens somewhere else. All sorts of different things are always happening all over the world. Luckily we don't see Canada trying to negotiate tariffs with individual states, or else the thing you mentioned might be similar to the situation we're discussing.

Also, as an aside, it's rude to dismiss the majority of Americans, who overwhelmingly oppose the harmful tariffs and the related government mismanagement of the economy, as "self-hating American Redditors". They likely love their country at least as much as those who favor destroying the economy and Americans' finances in the name of unprecedented partisan brinksmanship and power grabs.

> Also, as an aside, it's rude to dismiss the majority of Americans, who overwhelmingly oppose the harmful tariffs

OP didn’t say everyone who opposes the tariffs. He said people who support Canada openly stating they will impose retaliatory tariffs on red state products specifically, which is meddling with internal U.S. politics.

> retaliatory tariffs on red state products specifically, which is meddling with internal U.S. politics

As you said, they are retaliatory tariffs. This is no more meddling in politics than pissing into the wind and getting wet. Retaliatory tariffs were a foreseeable result of policy some people voted for, and now the results have splashed them.

There's no reason they shouldn't be disproportionately concentrated on those who caused them. In fact, that approaches an ideal world, right? One in which negative externalities are primarily borne by those responsible for them? And importantly, there is no negotiation, no quid-pro-quo. It is just the law of nature manifesting (you attack someone, it is expected that they will retaliate). There's no way to change that law.

There's a popular American republican trope that those who support higher taxes should be the exclusive ones paying those higher taxes. That's precisely what's happening here (tariffs = taxes). Everybody is getting what they want, except the majority of people who want a sane, fair, and predictable tariff regime built upon a foundation of mutual respect between equals – but at least this gets us closer to that. In a crap world, I can see that being progress worth celebrating.

Retaliatory tariffs aren't interfering in politics. Targeting them specifically at red states then publicizing that fact is interfering in politics.

> Retaliatory tariffs aren't interfering in politics. Targeting them specifically at red states then publicizing that fact is interfering in politics.

I respectfully don't agree, for the reasons stated in the above post and ignored in your reply. "Interfering in politics" better describes the more dire actions alleged in this article, with direct trade negotiations between a country and a state/province behind the back of the federal government – a significantly different situation indeed.

This is actually true.

But I think we need to be handling it differently. We need to make some structural changes, because the reality is that every global power center is going to be waging covert trade war against red states going forward. We need something comprehensive that makes individual states difficult to target. Because this response strategy is just a new reality. And will be the reality even if the left gets into power in the US. They won't let up. It's not in their interests to do so.

It's just reason number 5 million that the reality of conservative rule has fallen so far short of the promise of conservative rule for the US. I'm not certain there was any plan put in place to anticipate and mitigate likely responses. (And punishing trade policies targeting red states was an entirely predictable response.) Just gross ineptitude from the conservatives to not be prepared for that.

I don't even agree with their policies, but for Christ's sake, if you're gonna pursue those policies, wargame all that out and be prepared.

Now we gotta suffer through amateur hour while the keystone kops drive our country into the ground for two more years. This sucks.

I think a significant portion of the political culture war does revolve around this idea of anti-partiotism.

There is a vocal population that say america is evil, as are it's institutions, laws, and principles. This faction is particularly dominant in places like reddit.

A patriot can see faults in what their country does, as everybody and every organization of bodies makes mistakes. A patriot seeks atonement for those mistakes, to make things right, and come back stronger, with more support from the world.

It seems you're confusing patriotism with jingoism: "we're the greatest country in the world, we never make mistakes, so we don't need to learn from them, suck it victims, everyone is in a grand conspiracy against us because they're jealous, everything bad is bad because of that conspiracy", etc, that sort of thing. That's how you get the sort of "patriots" that one could find in 1939 Germany. I guess some people want that.

I agree that a patriot can be cognizant of shortcomings and Im not advocating jingoism.

I think there is a class of people who are less interested in constructive reform, and more interested in seeing america fail. They would rather everyone suffer than improve and thrive. Maybe they do see that as a form of atonement.

Can we call these the “Make America Better” faction? Or just “Make America Great”?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com