Tuesday: Hili dialogue
Welcome to The Cruelest Day: Tuesday, April 29, 2025, so tomorrow is the last day of the month. It’s National Zipper Day. Here’s a good short explanation of how zippers work, and I swear, I didn’t know until I saw this! Modern zippers were patented in the U.S. by Whitcomb L. Judson, a Chicago inventor, … Continue reading Tuesday: Hili dialogue
Welcome to The Cruelest Day: Tuesday, April 29, 2025, so tomorrow is the last day of the month. It’s National Zipper Day. Here’s a good short explanation of how zippers work, and I swear, I didn’t know until I saw this! Modern zippers were patented in the U.S. by Whitcomb L. Judson, a Chicago inventor, in 1892.
It’s also National Shrimp Scampi Day and National Rugelach Day, celebrating one of the few contributions of Jewish culture to world food cuisine. Here are rugelach cut open to show the filling of these crescent-shaped pastries:
Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the April 29 Wikipedia page.
Da Nooz:
*The Goose Won.
— Andy Craig (@andycraig.bsky.social) 2025-04-29T03:29:06.050Z
Mark Carney’s Liberal party won the Canadian elections, a consequential result that barely gets space in the NYT.
Prime Minister Mark Carney led his Liberal Party to a narrow victory in Canada’s pivotal election on Monday, securing a fourth term in power for the party and a renewed mandate to lead the fight against President Trump over trade and the nation’s sovereignty.
Mr. Carney, a former central banker who was running for office for the first time, struck a combative tone toward the United States during his acceptance speech in the early hours of Tuesday at a Liberal Party event in Ottawa.
It was unclear whether the Liberals would win a majority of seats in the next House of Commons, which would allow Mr. Carney to govern relatively unimpeded, or if his government would need to rely on smaller parties to support his legislative agenda.
Mr. Carney has not met Mr. Trump in person since becoming Liberal Party leader and prime minister last month. But he made Mr. Trump’s menacing comments about making Canada the 51st state and the tariffs he has imposed on Canadian goods the center of his campaign.
The two men held what was described as a professional call before the election, though Mr. Carney said during the campaign that Mr. Trump had brought up the 51st state threat during that conversation.
Mr. Carney has said that he will maintain Canada’s retaliatory tariffs against the United States. But he has cautioned that expanding them would harm Canadians more than they would pressure Americans.
. . . . . Mr. Carney’s victory was an extraordinary political comeback for the Liberals. Just a few months ago, they trailed the opposition Conservative Party under Pierre Poilievre by nearly 30 percentage points according to opinion polls, and it was widely expected that the Liberals faced a near-death experience.
But that was before Mr. Trump began talking about annexing Canada and imposing potentially crippling tariffs on the country.
It was also before Justin Trudeau, who many voters had soured on after nearly a decade in office, stepped down as prime minister.
Early in the campaign, polls started to suggest that the Conservatives’ sizable lead had evaporated and that the Liberals under Mr. Carney might be headed for a decisive win.
The Conservatives were leading by over points a few months ago, but fear of Trump, and greater confidence that Carney would deal with the American President better than would Poilievre. We are losing our trasitional friendship and alliance with Canada, and it’s Trump’s fault. And it’s sad.
Here are the election results from the NYT:
It's really hard to overstate how hugely favored conservatives were up until two months ago.Here's the graph of Canadian polling between March 2023 and March 2025. (Reminder: blue is conservative.)Those are months and months of 20+ point leads for Tories.
*Illinois governor J. B. Pritzker seems to be stepping onto the road of being the next Democratic candidate for President. Yesterday he spoke in New Hampshire, and certainly made pre-candidate noises with an excoriating attack on Trump:
Pritzker was most searing in his condemnation of what he cast as the Trump administration’s infringement on the rights enshrined in the Constitution, stating that it should be easy for Democrats to say, “It’s wrong to snatch a person off the street and ship them to a foreign gulag with no chance to defend themselves in a court of law.”
“Never before in my life have I called for mass protests, for mobilization, for disruption. But I am now,” Pritzker said to a standing ovation accompanied by whistles and cheers from the audience. “These Republicans cannot know a moment of peace. They must understand that we will fight their cruelty with every megaphone and microphone that we have. We must castigate them on the soap box and then punish them at the ballot box.”
. . . .Turning to his own party, Pritzker argued that Democrats have spent too long listening to voices who “would tell you that the house is not on fire, even as they feel the flames licking their face,” and called out politicians “whose simpering timidity served as a kindle for the arsonists.”
. . . In a 2028 field that is likely to be dominated by governors, Pritzker has positioned himself as one of the most forceful and consistent critics of Trump’s actions while pointing to his record in Illinois as a template for improving the lives of working-class voters.
Pritzker has been a good governor, and attacked Trump early on. What is lacking in the speech above is a program for Democrats; all he says is that Democrats haven’t been sufficiently aware of Trump’s dangers. But that alone won’t win elections. It’s too early for Pritzker to start touting his accomplishments in our state, which are substantial and admirable, but up to now I thought he wasn’t interested in the Presidency. Now I’m not so sure, and I, for one, would be in favor of his candidacy.
*Reader Debra sent me the tweet below, and I was puzzled. It must have been a fake ad, right?
Why do you keep failing, @Nike? pic.twitter.com/AjEbj8WqWI
— The Mossad: Satirical and Awesome (@TheMossadIL) April 28, 2025
But no! A Spectator piece by Jonathan Sacardoti, “Nike’s ‘never again’ slogan is a disgrace,” reveals that, while it may be unwitting and hamhanded, it’s an “insulting and profoundly distasteful” reference to the Holocaust. (The “never again” slogan is well known referece to the mass slaughter of Jews during WWII.)
Fifty-six thousand runners completing the London Marathon yesterday may well have gasped the words ‘never again’ as they staggered across the finish line. I have never been a runner, but I imagine that even those who willingly endure the 26.2-mile ordeal must feel not only a profound sense of accomplishment but also, at the very least, a fleeting pang of regret.
Yet when I saw the Nike advertisement – hoisted from a crane like an executed Iranian dissident, swaying precariously in front of that modern-day emblem of our capital city, the London Eye – bearing the slogan “Never again. Until next year,” my mind immediately traveled to darker places. What, I wondered, has a running race to do with the Holocaust?
Only last week, my essay commemorating Yom HaShoah, the Jewish Holocaust memorial day, was published in these pages. It focused entirely on the solemn imperative embodied in the promise of “never again,” especially at a moment when Jews worldwide feel increasingly imperilled by a new, unashamed surge of hatred and discrimination. I argued that “never again” cannot simply be reduced to a catchphrase; that remembering the Holocaust is not itself sufficient to fulfil the pledge; that to honour it fully, we must recognise and confront contemporary manifestations of Jew-hatred.
. . .For a moment, I questioned myself. Perhaps I was overreacting. After all, can any single historical catastrophe – or any one persecuted group – claim exclusive ownership over a phrase? Perhaps Nike’s marketing team didn’t even think of the Shoah. Perhaps the creatives who conceived the idea – seated high in their glass towers – simply did not think along those lines. Never. Again. Just two simple words. What else might a runner exclaim upon crossing the finish line to collect a medal and a time slip? Perhaps their managers, toasting another advertising triumph over boozy lunches, were equally oblivious. Perhaps the technician who programmed the screen, and the team that hoisted it skyward for all to see, were simply unaware of the phrase’s gravest historical weight.
But then I remembered how upset it made people when anyone veered too close to ‘black lives matter’ or other popular slogans of our day. My anger only deepened. How could they? How could a giant like Nike – and all the many people involved between conception and execution – fail to recognise the most solemn and famous usage of those words? Or worse, perhaps they did, and decided it did not matter.
It is difficult to extend them the benefit of the doubt. It would have taken just one set of discerning eyes, one solitary voice, one ‘sensitivity reader’ to raise a gentle objection. Did not a single Jew suggest that it might be inappropriate? Did not a single non-Jew, with a grasp of history or an awareness of today’s climate, flag it? If not, why not? Was this ignorance, carelessness, or a chilling indifference?
Well, I will extend them the benefit of the doubt, simply because I cannot believe that they would appropriate a Holocaust trope to advertise a marathon. Perhaps Nike will issue a statement.
*Somewhat frustrated in his attempt to deport people, Trump is, according to the WSJ, preparing a list of “sanctuary cities and states” that don’t cooperate with the Administration in deportations. This is done, of course, so he can promulgate more deportations as well as punish those who try to protect undocumented immigrants.
President Trump plans to sign an executive order on Monday escalating his battle against Democratic-led states and cities that don’t fully cooperate with federal immigration authorities, a key barrier to the mass deportations he has promised.
The order, which was viewed by The Wall Street Journal, directs the attorney general and the secretary of Homeland Security to identify within a month cities and states that aren’t complying with federal immigration laws, designating them as “sanctuary jurisdictions.”
The cities and states on the list could face a cutoff in federal funding and possible criminal and civil suits if they refuse to change their laws or practices.
“It’s quite simple: obey the law, respect the law, and don’t obstruct federal immigration officials and law-enforcement officials when they are simply trying to remove public safety threats from our nation’s communities,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday at a briefing alongside Tom Homan, Trump’s border czar.
Trump will also direct the Justice Department to pursue civil-rights cases against cities or states that, in its view, favor immigrants in the country illegally over U.S. citizens. The order cites policies that treat immigrants more leniently in criminal cases or sentencing and state laws that provide immigrants in-state tuition rates at public universities but deny the lower rates to out-of-state U.S. citizens. At least 25 states have adopted such laws in some fashion.
Sanctuary cities and states have become a major obstacle for Trump as he has sought to drive up deportations in line with his campaign pledge. Most immigrants in the country tend to cluster in large cities like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles, and the administration has a tougher time arresting those here illegally if local police refuse to assist.
I wonder if the American people, seeing the kind of deportations that have occurred, will change their stand from the opposition to illegal immigration (a stand that helped Trump win) to an anti-Trumpism reflecting disgust with how he’s carrying out his campaign promises. There’s no doubt that the man is on a tear, and doesn’t have much to lose (save what reputation he has). I do agree with many who thought the “border problem” needed fixing during the Biden administration, but I can’t imagine a worse way of doing that fix.
*Here is a passionate 10-minute speech by Natasha Hausdorff on overcoming the international hatred of Israel. And it looks as if it was extemperaneous, since she’s not using or looking at notes. I always feel heartened that a person that I am on the side of a person this learned, smart, and eloquent.
The YouTube notes explain a bit: “Natasha Hausdorff, UKLFI Charitable Trust Legal Director, addresses the inaugural International Policy Summit of the Jewish News Syndicate (JNS) at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in Jerusalem on Sunday, 27 April 2025, on ‘The UN and International Courts: Law, Legitimacy and Bias’.” (There’s a 12-minute interview with her at the same conference here.)
And, click on the screenshot below to see Fareed Zakaria’s take at CNN on how Trump’s assault on science, including discouraging immigrants who want to do science, is damaging America. Reader Pat, who sent me the link, describes it:
For his opening essay (take) on Sunday on CNN, Fareed Zakaria discussed the rise of science in the USA after WWII, the importance of immigrants to those efforts, the current dismantling by the Trump administration and the fact that those actions may have more long-term negative consequences for the country than things garnering all the attention, like tariffs. The video is 5:41 long.
Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili is pensive. Malgorzata explains, “Just that some decisions have unintended consequences and it would be better without them. They were not neededas they made the problem worse instead of better.”
Hili: We have to make a few important decisions.A; Sometimes important decisions lead to unnecessary changes.
In Polish:
Hili: Musimy podjąć kilka ważnych decyzji.Ja: Czasami ważne decyzje prowadzą do zbędnych zmian.
*******************
From Duck Lovers:
From America’s Cultural Decline Into Idiocy: Look at that bill!
From Now That’s Wild. This cannot be real!
Masih is still quiet, but here’s JKR responding to a video interview, but actually she pens a long tweet in defense of classical feminism:
Women fought for years, not to pretend they weren’t women, but to seek to redress the wrongs done to their sex class because of their biology.
Women and girls are coerced, persecuted and controlled all over the world by the larger, stronger male. Even in our most liberal… https://t.co/5qkbZR8mRX
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) April 28, 2025
From Enrico: identity-based publication in the Harvard Law Review:
There really is no way to sugarcoat how illiberal and harmful these practices at the Harvard Law Review are. Similar practices have been in place at other elite law schools, alas. https://t.co/FAbkDidUia
— Nicholas A. Christakis (@NAChristakis) April 26, 2025
A funny one from reader Simon.
