The Current - Margaret Atwood: Canadians either ‘sorry or you’ll be sorry’

Episode Date: September 8, 2026

Canadian authors Margaret Atwood and Stephen Marche reflect on what it means to be Canadian during a trade war, and what we need to consider when it comes to our culture, identity and politics in this moment.

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I took the road less traveled. After all the awkwardness, disasters, and family drama, Mark Critch, is finally graduating. Maybe it's about not settling for the way things are, but making your own way. No, it's both jobs. And to move forward, he must hold on to what matters most. Don't give up on your dreams. Say goodbye to a Canadian comedy we've grown up with. Son of a Critch, the final season.

Stream now on CBC Jam. This is a CBC podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway, and this is the current podcast. For almost her entire career, the author Margaret Atwood, has helped shape, tell, and promote Canadian stories here and abroad. Margaret Atwood joins us now. Margaret, good morning. Good morning, Matt. How are you? Well, I'm well. How are you feeling about being Canadian in this moment? Well, I've been here before.

I'm old. enough to remember two other occasions, one of them being in the middle to late 60s, when we created a lot of the cultural institutions that we have today, including a number of publishers, and after that the Writers' Union, the Writers' Trust, and then Penn Canada. So let's say the 60s, let's say the Free Trade War, remember that one, Brian Mulroney. Okay, Graham and I were against it for the very reason you have just seen. If you get that integrated and the other side is bigger, they can pull the carpet out from under you at any moment. And now there's now.

And I have heard a catchy saying, which is Canadians have two modes, Sorry and You'll Be Sorry. And I think we're in You'll Be Sorry right now. Bob Ray has a book coming out, which is an anthology of people writing about these issues, including me, which is called Reclaiming Canadian Sovereignty. Because we did lose some of it. Did we not? When we got too closely enmeshed, and now we're finding that that enmeshment has not been working in our favor. What do you think, if you're talking about reclaiming Canadian sovereignty?

sovereignty. What is the opportunity for Canada in this moment? Well, I think the opportunity for Canada is what we're doing. We're diversifying trade. It's a very fine tightrope that the Prime Minister is walking because on the one hand, he wants us to be more environmentally friendly, he wants to cut carbon emissions, but on the other hand, how are you going to pay for all this? And one of those things is oil. So it's a fine, balance. And it's going to take a lot of pretty adroit thinking on the part of the government. And I think we are seeing some of that, but I think we're also seeing a lot of worry from people in general. But it's not giving up worry. It's not whether we're going to do this,

but how we're going to do this. What does the reaction of Canadians, and it's not just that using the phrase elbows up, but people rallying around their nation, buying Canadian saying, we're going to travel in this country. I was just, you know, on the East Coast. And you saw Canadians from all across the country who perhaps might have gone somewhere else and they're going to Prince Edward Island or they're going to move on. Yeah, one's the same. And so is everybody I know.

But people always underestimate Canadians because we have an outward appearance of being nice. And nice translates as weak to some people. But I would just go back and look at the Canadian war record if I were some of those people. And it was pretty ferocious, especially the Van Dus and in Quebec were very feared because they were very firm. Actually, they were very frightening. So don't underestimate Canadians, and you can say that to Canadians too. When we get mad, we're mad. And I think we're mad.

Do you worry at all about the cost of this? You have a president who is lashing it, and it's not just renaming a lake, that he could do real economic damage. Oh, yeah. And he is, but it's tit for tat because he's doing real economic damage to the northern states that border Canada. And those are swing states. So he's not just doing economic damage to those people. He's doing political damage to his own party.

And I would say that's not a tippany top smart thing to do. You have been very clear in saying that the fight that we have is not with Americans per se. Absolutely not. But with American leaders. Tell me more about that and what you would want to hear. We know that there are a lot of Americans who listen to the CBC. What would you want to hear from them in this moment? Well, what they should hear from us is number one, there are neighbors, but number two, a lot of us have friends in the states and business relationships in the states and relatives in the states.

And a lot of Americans have got relatives here. And you would say, surely you wouldn't go to war against your relatives and we just tick the American Civil War. Sure, they would go to war against their relatives they have before. and so of lots of countries. But we do have very close relationships, and a lot of people have traveled widely in the United States, including me. And, of course, my audiences are self-selected, but you couldn't ask for nicer, warm, or more welcoming people.

Let me just end by going back to where you started, which is you have seen some of these fights before. What would your message be to those of us who are new to this, who are in this now for the first time and they're wondering how long this fight is going to go, but also whether we have the stomach for a fight like this. What's at stake and what should we do? Yeah, sure, tough enough. I mean, maybe I've got my generations wrong and maybe younger generations feel that

everything should go well in their lives all the time. But, you know, it doesn't. And I won't use a rude word, but something beginning with that. happens and this is some of that something beginning with us and it happens and I know that people can get through it and I would say we need to possibly form some help your neighbors associations in addition to what the government is doing who got thrown out of a job his family is is in trouble financially and and pitch in We've done it before.

It's great to talk to you as always. Margaret, thank you very much. And thank you, Matt. National Treasure, Margaret Atwood, Canadian author. Two roads diverged in a wood, and I took the road less traveled. After all the awkwardness, disasters, and family drama, Mark Critch, is finally graduating. Maybe it's about not settling for the way things are, but making your own way. No, it's about jobs.

And to move forward, he must hold on to one. What Matters Most. Don't give up on your dreams. Say goodbye to a Canadian comedy we've grown up with. Son of a critch, the final season. Stream now on CBC Jam. Stephen Marsh is the author of many books, including The Next Civil War, Dispatches from the American Future. He is also the host of a very popular podcast. It's called Gloves Off. Stephen, good morning to you. Hey, Matt, how you doing? What does it mean to be Canadian right now? I think probably what's really interesting about this moment is that we're at the beginning

of figuring out what that is. And I think that's, I mean, there's sort of some interesting shots, like some shoots coming out from under the snow. I mean, I think one thing is we have this obvious emphasis on sovereignty, and we're quite stubborn about it. I mean, we have decided not to engage with the American trade regime. We're the only country in the Western liberal world that's decided to do that. That's not like the Canada that I think I knew when I was a kid.

It's a much more confident. Canada. And then also we've decided, unlike the rest of the world, to not close off, that we've decided to remain open to the world and to preserve that openness that we cherish. So, I mean, I think what Canada is not really known right now, I think we're about to become ourselves in some really new way. I think this is a historic moment for Canada. This is the beginning of our identity. It's interesting in part because, and we've mentioned this already, for many people, for a long time, a big chunk of their Canadian identity

has been tied to what we aren't, right? And the things that we are not, particularly from south of the border. So are you seeing that identity? I mean, we're getting there, but are you seeing that identity shift in this moment? I think we've got to totally change this narrative. I mean, it was Marshall McLuhan,

who in 1963 said Canada's the only country that can live without an identity. I mean, walk around the world. We're weird. We're getting really different. We're not boring and normal. Like we're we are we are no longer like taking bits from other countries and stitching them together into some kind of hole like what Canada is what it what it has what it represents is actually quite distinct and I mean perhaps that's not articulated fully but we all feel it. We all we all know it like the threat came to our sovereignty and we're like no no no we are different.

We are ourselves and I mean that's that that I think that whole narrative of of who. Who are we? Like, we know who we are. The question is, the question is, what will we become? And that's such a more interesting question to me. Do you think that this has opened a broader conversation about what's possible in Canada? Yeah, well, in the world, too, right? I mean, I think one of the things about Carnegie's Davos speech and also about the refusal of this trade agreement is that, you know, for our whole lifetime, Matt, I mean, I've known you since we were kids. Like, you know, every political. question has ultimately been an economic question. Right, left center. Like, it's, you know, how much inequality are we willing to deal with so much wealth generation? These are the sort of questions that have been. Karnia said there are questions that transcend economics. There are political issues of sovereignty that transcend dollars and cents. And I think it's actually a big

change for the world because we, the old order is fading and the old order is practically dead. And a new order will have to be built out of it. Not just for us, but for the whole world. Do you expect that to be tested when people feel directly feel the pinch from what's going on right now? Well, I don't know. I mean, I think, you know, as I said in that New York Times piece, like, I think Canadians actually, like, are endurance is what we're built for, right?

Like, we're used to enduring things. And, you know, like, to preserve democracy and to fight for his country, like, they strap my grandfather to the back of a Hamilton bomber. we're not being asked of anything remotely close to those sacrifices. And the stakes are absolutely our sovereignty and the survival of our democracy. So, you know, the pain is definitely coming. Like, we all know it's coming. And it will be real.

Like, but I think we should keep things in a bit of perspective. There are things that are, it's worth being slightly less wealthy to be yourself. You mentioned just finally that New York Times piece. You wrote a piece in the New York Times about this moment. And it went all over the world. people were paying attention. What do you think Canada should expect or should hope for when it comes to support from other nations who find themselves in a similar situation, being threatened by the United States? And they haven't perhaps stood up, but we have.

Well, I think we, you know, we are going, first of all, we, you know, one of the things that's so interesting about the Carney decision is that rather than do like a, you know, a search for what everyone else is doing in the world and then trying to triangulate. our own kind of position to it, we were like, no, we are doing what we believe is right. You're all wrong. That alone is a pretty drastic thing for a Canadian politician to do. And then to have 76% of the country support it is even more drastic. But the truth is, like, we both can't count on anybody's help. Like, I don't think the Europeans are coming to help us at all. On the other hand, we need to make as many connections as possible.

We need to integrate ourselves with as many institution of, that we can to empower ourselves. I mean, that is the task ahead. That is, that is the task that is going to be the next year, two years of Canadian political life. How can we preserve ourselves through security with other, with securing arrangements with other jurisdictions? Stephen, good to talk to you as always.

Thank you. Always a pleasure, Matt. Stephen Marsh is the author, is an author and the host of the very popular podcast. It's called Gloves Off. Joseph Steinberg is an economist and professor at the United States. of Toronto, and one of the reasons why we wanted to talk to Joseph this morning was because Canada's retaliatory tariffs has come into effect today. 27.6 billion dollars in products imported from the U.S. now subject to tariffs between 15 and 50 percent matching the U.S. tariffs on

Canadian products, dollar for dollar. Joseph, good morning to you. Good morning. Thanks for having me. Is that retaliatory tariff approach, the right approach in this moment. My own assessment is that it's not the right approach. I know many Canadians disagree with that, but I've been writing about this for the last year and a half ever since this trade conflict got started. And, you know, it is my opinion that retaliation does not serve the Canadian economy well. Explain that because to your point, yes, many, many Canadians do believe that having been punched in the nose, it is time for Canada to throw a punch back. Why do you think that's a foolish strategy? Well, let me start by taking some words from Premier Ford.

So I often disagree with the Premier, but one thing he's 100% correct about when he goes down south and advocates that American tariffs on Canadian products are really taxes on American consumers. He's 100% right. But you've got to flip that logic around and apply it to our own counter tariffs. Our counter tariffs are taxes on Canadian consumers. They hurt the Canadian economy. And so you have to look at it as a kind of cost-benefit analysis, if you will. I mean, I'm an economist, so that's the natural way to think about things. But you have to recognize that these retaliatory tariffs impose a cost on our economy.

And so then you have to ask yourself, what is the benefit? And why is the benefit larger than the cost? And my assessment is that the benefit is pretty nebulous, the probability that it is going to change, that this course of action is going to change the way that the U.S. does business with us, at least over the next couple of years, without the rest of the Trump administration. And I think it's also likely that, you know, we're already seeing that the president is planning to engage in further escalation, you know, thinking about banning bombardier aircraft, outright banning Canadian alcohol. The likelihood that this will actually escalate and impose even greater costs on the Canadian economy,

I think is, you know, quite honestly, much larger than the likelihood that this course of action is going to end with us kind of getting something that we might want. What is the alternative then? If the prime minister and his negotiators said that what was being offered impacted Canadian sovereignty but also was written in pencil, not in pen, and the sense is that it doesn't matter what we say that the United States will impose its own will. and that Canadians want their government to stand up in some ways. What's the better alternative than the retaliatory tariffs, do you think? The better alternative is to just not play the tariff game. Again, imposing counter tariffs is a cost that Canadians, not Americans, largely bear. And so my view is, you know, don't play the game. You don't want to accept the deal.

Great. I'm largely supportive of the prime minister having walked away from the deal. Again, we don't know exactly what the details of that deal were. but on balance, I think it was the right decision. The wrong decision was to say, we're not going to take this deal and we're going to impose additional tariffs in response. The right course of action would have been to walk away from the deal

and as tough as it is, do nothing as tariffs go. You know, turn inward, focus on what we can control in terms of our own policy and make our own economy more competitive, more productive, and, you know, more prosperous in the long run. Just very briefly, Do you see a path back to that negotiating table? I think over the medium term I certainly see a path back to the negotiating table.

I'm hopeful that there's a path back before that, you know, President Trump hopefully leaves office at the end of this term. But I think, you know, the next administration certainly offers a chance for some kind of a reset. The reality is that our economies are still heavily intertwined, both sides, you know, regardless of the rhetoric, benefit tremendously from trading with one another. and economic actors on both sides of the border are not going to want to kind of turn their backs on that. The economics are there. On a popular position to bring up at a dinner party, though, I guess.

It's not a popular position to bring up. I would say that I will say, though, that if you talk to other economists, my sense is that more economists than not agree with me. That's why it's really important to have you here, Joseph. I'm really glad to have you as part of this conversation. Thank you very much. Yep, you're welcome. Thanks for having me. Joseph Steinberg is an economist and professor at the University of Toronto.

You've been listening to the current podcast. My name is Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening. I'll talk to you soon. For more CBC podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.