this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2026
32 points (88.1% liked)

Canada

11791 readers
811 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
32
submitted 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) by patatas@sh.itjust.works to c/canada@lemmy.ca
 

“The U.S. wants to achieve energy dominance. We support you in that view,” Hodgson said. “We will win this race.”

Hodgson told POLITICO that energy dominance could be achieved if the U.S. and Canada work together as “Fortress North America.”

(apologies for the paywall - I figured the quote was shareworthy enough on its own, but if anyone is able to share the article's full text please lmk and I'll add it to this section)

top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

The US is not looking for energy dominance, they're looking to maximize revenue for O&G companies. There's a heck of a difference. For energy dominance, the last thing you want to do is scrap a $1B offshore wind project as they just did.

For energy dominance, the first thing to do is to maximize renewables. I don't need to read the article, the title means nothing but to flood both countries with wind turbines and solar panels so that locals don't have to burn their own fuel.

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

In supporting continued war on GCC, energy dominance is extorting people to continue relying on oil/NG, including our own citizens, for glory of hypno Exxon. You are right that basic accounting logic will destroy demand for such fuels such that further investment gets stranded eventually.

[–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Koch industries.

[–] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 hours ago

It's up to you/us to avoid being extorted. I know I am.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 7 points 6 hours ago

Smash the petrostate.

[–] Routhinator@startrek.website 0 points 3 hours ago

This government and their knee bending is making me regret being Canadian

[–] ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca 27 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

Are you fucking serious??

EDIT: Ok so... to add to my reaction (I was on my phone and didn't want to type a full paragraph), we're basically endorsing the U.S. attacking Venezuela and kidnapping their country's political leader, bombing Iran and killing innocent people, and essentially endoring their previous wars in Iraq while we're at it because we all know what those were for. Like, how can Canada support this? Is it to appease Alberta with their threat of separation? Is the federal government so fucking spineless that they'll support genocide and murder, instead of growing one and telling Alberta to sit the fuck down and shut up?

We should be accelerating alternative energies to get oil out of the fucking equation as much as possible. We should be moving towards increasing electrified public transit infrastructure, electric vehicles and I'm not talking automobiles, but delivery trucks, vans, trash collecting vehicles, buses, etc. And investing in solar and wind power generation. Also reducing the use of plastics and a whole bunch of other petro-products.

We have a fucking banker with no fucking vision for a prime minister. He's still using the same old formulas and the same old ideas with the same old markets like those things are still going to save "the economy" (read businesses, not people's ability to purchase) with no regard for the environment because "it's not profitable" or whatever the fuck,

[–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 7 points 13 hours ago

We suck a mean dick.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 10 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Unlike in the US, we very much CAN recall Hodgson.

[–] patatas@sh.itjust.works 7 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe i'm misunderstanding your comment, but Hodgson is a cabinet minister, not an ambassador. This is government policy, apparently!

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 8 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

Yes; we can recall elected officials with a vote of non confidence in their riding.

They’re recalled from cabinet to their riding, which then holds another election.

[–] patatas@sh.itjust.works 5 points 12 hours ago

I was aware of this mechanism existing in Alberta, but I'm pretty certain it doesn't exist federally ... ?

[–] yakko@feddit.uk 2 points 10 hours ago

Pitter patter!

[–] datavoid@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I'm down to vote NDP, but realistically if there is another vote it's going to be PP, who will just do the same things but worse.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

They're not talking about forcing a general election. A recall vote just forces a new vote for that one seat.

They said, I'm not sure we have that federally. I think it's just certain provinces.

[–] patatas@sh.itjust.works 5 points 14 hours ago

COOL, COOL COOL COOL