The declaration of “America is back” by President Donald Trump rings through the halls of power with a resonance that’s both reassuring to some and disconcerting to others. But as we delve deeper into his policies and the current state of the nation, a pressing question arises: Back to what, precisely? The rhetoric suggests a return to greatness, yet the reality paints a picture that seems to harken back to an era less democratic and more autocratic.
Trump’s imposition of tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China has been described by The Economist as an unexpected upheaval, causing a ripple of economic isolationism reminiscent of the protectionist policies of the late 19th century. Readers of The Globe and Mail express concern that these actions dismantle decades of progress toward free trade that the U.S. once championed. The United States, a founding figure in reducing global trade barriers through agreements like GATT and the WTO, now appears to be retreating to a time when tariffs were the norm rather than the exception.
The editorial from The Globe and Mail paints a picture of a U.S. pivoting away from its Western allies towards the arms of the Kremlin. This shift raises questions about America’s role as a reliable ally in the post-war era, a period when it provided security and leadership against totalitarianism. Reader comments reflect unease over the abandonment of long-held security guarantees and the potential fallout for global stability. The U.S. seems to be distancing itself from the very alliances it helped to build, suggesting a return to an era of isolationism and unilateralism.
Domestically, Trump’s administration is characterized by significant upheaval, with an unelected billionaire like Elon Musk reportedly wielding power to fire civil servants. The concentration of power in the hands of a few individuals and the erosion of institutional norms evoke a time before the robust checks and balances established by the founding fathers. Reader comments express fears of a permanent alteration in governance, with democracy itself appearing to be under threat.
February 4, 2025
Trump’s rhetoric of annexing territories and embracing former adversaries echoes imperial expansionism. The notion of America “being back” might conjure images of a time when nations were led by divine kings, wielding unchecked power and pursuing imperial ambitions. This raises the question of whether Trump’s vision aligns with the democratic ideals and international cooperation that have long defined American leadership.
As Trump declares “America is back,” the question remains: Back to what historical period does he refer? Is it a return to economic isolationism, diplomatic withdrawal, and centralized power reminiscent of monarchies? For a nation that once stood as a beacon of democracy and global leadership, the current trajectory seems at odds with the principles that have guided it for over two centuries.
February 6, 2019
In this context, the call for vigilance and reflection becomes imperative. Understanding what “America is back” truly means is crucial for the nation and the world, as the implications of this rhetoric reverberate across borders and generations. The path forward must reconcile the nation’s historical ideals with the challenges and complexities of the modern world.
America is back (To c1534)
Just wrapped up another day at the drawing board, capturing the political scene. If you know my work, you’ll recall my detailed chart of English and British monarchs. In the Trump 2.0 era, though he’s been in power just six weeks, I’ve already illustrated him in royal attire a few times.
U.S. history has seen presidents compared to overbearing kings when they veer from the essence of a presidency, rooted in the republic’s founding ideals. Yet here we are with Donald Trump, the “anti-President,” echoing the Vatican’s anti-popes and Oliver Cromwell’s flirtation with kingship. Trump, who seems to relish the company of monarchs and dictators, has expressed his kingly aspirations openly.
What’s more, his followers are urging him to break term limits and push for a third term, a notion that challenges the legitimacy of democratic elections. It’s as if Trump and his circle of enablers have forgotten that a U.S. President isn’t meant to play king. With MAGA’s fealty and his grand rhetoric about territories, when Trump says “America is Back,” it feels like a nod to Tudor times
Check out my making-of animated editorial cartoon for March 6, 2025, below! If you haven’t yet, please subscribe to my Substack newsletter, where I share weekly editorial cartoons every Saturday morning. Substack is a crucial platform for me amidst the uncertainties of being a staff cartoonist, especially given recent layoffs and newspaper closures affecting our field. As long as I hold my position, subscriptions will remain free. Thank you for your support! This “note” helps craft my weekly posts and showcases animated versions of my cartoons. Enjoy!
The Looming Shadow of Trump’s so called Golden Age
November 7, 2024
As the United States prepares to usher in Donald Trump’s second term, there are bold promises of a new golden age—one that promises unprecedented happiness and prosperity for the privileged few while casting deep shadows of misery over the masses. For Canada and the broader world, the implications of this era are both profound and unsettling.
One of the most immediate and troubling aspects of Trump’s agenda is the promise of mass deportations of undocumented migrants within the United States. This policy not only threatens the lives and livelihoods of millions but also stands as a stark reminder of the administration’s willingness to prioritize exclusion over empathy. For Canadians, known for our commitment to inclusivity and humanitarian values, these actions represent a departure from the principles that bind our two nations in friendship and cooperation.
Trump’s promise to impose a 25% tariff on imports, including those from key trade partners like Canada, poses a significant threat to our economic stability. The interconnectedness of our economies means that such tariffs could lead to job losses and economic disruptions on both sides of the border. For Canadians, who have long enjoyed a robust trading relationship with the United States, this policy threatens not only economic prosperity but also the spirit of collaboration that has defined our bilateral relations.
The potential for Trump to push Ukraine into concessions with Russia raises alarms about global stability and justice. As Canadians, we have long stood for peace and the defence of sovereign nations against aggression. Any move that undermines Ukraine’s sovereignty could set a dangerous precedent, emboldening authoritarian regimes while compromising the democratic ideals we hold dear.
October 26, 2024
Perhaps most concerning is the broader societal impact of Trump’s policies, which seem to deepen the divide between a burgeoning oligarchy and the rest of society. At the centre of this oligarchic circle is Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, who has found a prominent role in Trump’s orbit. Musk’s influence, alongside other billionaires like Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and the Murdoch family, epitomizes the concentration of wealth and power that threatens democratic ideals. These individuals, with their vast resources, have the potential to shape policy and public opinion in ways that prioritize their interests over those of the general populace.
As Trump takes the oath of office, some of these modern-day barons will likely be sitting on the very dais, a stark symbol of the cozy relationship between political power and wealth. One can only imagine Teddy Roosevelt, the trust-busting president who fought against the robber barons of his time, spinning in his grave at the sight of such blatant coddling of today’s tycoons.
In an era where the ultra-rich continue to accumulate unprecedented wealth, policies that inflict suffering on the vulnerable only exacerbate existing inequalities. The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few echoes the concerns of an oligarchic system, one where the interests of the many are overshadowed by the few. For Canadians, who value fairness and equality, the spectre of a society where happiness is derived from the misery of others is deeply troubling.
January 4, 2025
As we brace for the changes that Trump 2.0 will bring, it is essential for Canadians to reflect on our values and the kind of world we wish to promote. While the challenges are significant, they also present an opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to inclusion, cooperation, and justice. By standing firm in our principles, Canada can serve as a beacon of hope and a model for equitable governance in an increasingly divided world.
While the coming Trump administration may bring uncertainty and challenges, it also underscores the importance of solidarity and resilience. As Canadians, we must tread the choppy waters of this new era with determination and commitment to our core values, ensuring that we remain a force for good in a world that desperately needs it. The threat of oligarchy, underscored by the influence of figures like Musk and other billionaire elites, only strengthens our resolve to champion democracy and equality for all.
As Donald Trump gets set for his inauguration (announced just today that it’s to move indoors due to… get this… a blast of cold Arctic air coming in from Canada on January 20, ironically,) there’s a growing sense of unease, particularly from a Canadian perspective. The promises of a “new golden age” seem to shine brightest for the privileged elite, leaving many of us across the border concerned about the widening gap between the ultra-rich and the rest of society.
Trump’s tax cuts appear poised to further enrich billionaires, exacerbating income inequality and leaving social justice, human rights, and environmental advocates bracing for challenging times ahead. His aggressive stance on immigration, with plans for mass deportations, threatens to bring misery to undocumented migrants in the United States, while his approach to foreign policy, particularly regarding Ukraine, could destabilize global peace efforts.
For us Canadians, the looming 25% tariffs on imports are especially troubling. These tariffs not only risk economic strain and job losses in Canada but also hint at a broader trend of isolationism and protectionism that could strain our historically close relationship with the United States.
Under Trump’s leadership, there is an unsettling convergence of political power and wealth, drawing parallels with oligarchies where influential oligarchs wield significant control over governance. This shift raises alarms about the future of democratic values, as the comforted will likely find more comfort, while the afflicted may face increased hardships. It’s a reality that many Americans seem content with, but for those of us looking in from the outside, there’s little to celebrate.
As Canadians, we value inclusivity, cooperation, and justice. The coming years may require us to reflect deeply on these principles and act to uphold them, not just within our own borders but in our interactions with the world. It’s going to be a challenging ride, but in adversity, there’s an opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to these values and work towards a more equitable future for all.
Please enjoy the January 18, 2025 making-of animated editorial cartoon below. Please subscribe to my Substack newsletter, if you haven’t already. Posts come out every Friday or Saturday as I summarize the week that was in my editorial cartoons. What you’re reading now is regarded as a “note”, which is used to help compose my weekly posts and showcase the animated versions of my daily editorial cartoons.
Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday June 20, 2023
Grocery Monopoly: Big Chains Face Windfall Tax and Code of Conduct Scrutiny
June 18, 2020
In a classic case of Monopoly come to life, the parliamentary agriculture committee is calling for Ottawa to slap a windfall tax on the owners of Big Grocery if they dare to generate excess profits on food items. These wealthy Uncle Milburn Pennybags-like figures must be feeling the heat as the committee released its report on June 13, capitalizing on Canadians’ frustration with rising inflation during their weekly grocery run.
The committee highlighted that while the food and beverage retail sector has been dealing with supply chain issues and labor shortages, they conveniently managed to record an increase in net income. This has led to speculation about the so-called “price gouging” by Canada’s five largest retailers, who hold a whopping 80 percent of the grocery market. It seems the committee is playing the role of Detective Weak Police, wondering if anyone at the Competition Bureau is actually paying attention to what’s happening right before their eyes.
However, the owners of these Big Grocery chains were quick to defend themselves. They appeared before the parliamentary committee in March and took the oath to solemnly swear that they weren’t profiteering off higher grocery prices. Galen Weston, the president of Loblaw, one of the major players, even had the audacity to argue that “reasonable profitability” is simply part of running a successful business. Oh, how noble of them! Apparently, those profits are just being reinvested into the company and, of course, into the oh-so-needy country.
But if the government decides to implement this windfall tax, it will surely hit the grocers where it hurts the most—their bottom lines. Of course, this hinges on the findings of the Competition Bureau, which is currently conducting a study of food inflation. As expected, the bureau released a statement listing various factors that could have impacted food prices, including extreme weather, higher input costs, geopolitical events like Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and supply chain disruptions. They seem to be exploring every excuse in the book rather than addressing the elephant in the room—questionable competition factors.
April 13, 2023
Not everyone is convinced that a windfall tax is warranted, though. Gary Sands, the vice-president of government relations at the Canadian Federation of Independent Grocers, adamantly denies any evidence of “greedflation.” He argues that price increases are not limited to the big grocery chains but are apparent in smaller stores as well, as everyone is simply responding to supplier price hikes. Sands presented his case to the committee and warned them of the slippery slope they’re treading on. He rightly points out that if retailers face a windfall tax, suppliers should be subjected to the same treatment, given the interconnected nature of the industry.
The government, however, wants everyone to know that they’re not just picking on grocers. No, no, they’re committed to ensuring that everyone pays their “fair share” of taxes. Adrienne Vaupshas, the press secretary of the federal minister of finance’s office, had the audacity to claim in an email statement that the government has imposed taxes on other companies like banks and insurers in the past. Well, that makes it all fair and square, doesn’t it?
According to Michelle Wasylyshen, the spokesperson for the Retail Council of Canada, the industry’s price hikes are justified by various macroeconomic trends and have nothing to do with greed. She blames the rising costs of feed, fuel, and fertilizer, along with supply chain disruptions, labor shortages, and climate events, as the real culprits behind food price inflation. Wasylyshen warns against excessive government intervention in the retail food business, claiming there’s no evidence to suggest that meddling in operational aspects would do anything to benefit consumers.
But of course, there are always those who believe that government intervention is the holy grail to control Canada’s grocery oligopoly. Advocates have been clamoring for a grocery code of conduct, similar to those in Australia and the United Kingdom, to rein in the power of Big Grocery. Finally, after years of deliberation and consultation with industry players, it seems that the code is nearing completion. Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau even boasts that it could be implemented before the end of 2023. However, the agriculture committee insists that the code must be mandatory and enforceable, or else there’s no guarantee that all the major grocers will willingly sign on. (AI)