Canadian Politics

[Mark F]

There are some posters that comment here referring to rampant Marxism, or communism in Canada.

Since we are really, in any reasonable analysis a corporate and business friendly country with public health care, ( Thanks only to Tommy Douglas, And the NDP) I was wondering where those people get the idea from.

an example of corporate friendliness:

"In 2013, Canadian-headquartered mining and exploration companies accounted for nearly 31% of global exploration expenditures. In 2013, over 50% of the world’s publically listed exploration and mining companies were headquartered in Canada. These 1500 companies had an interest in some 8000 properties in over 100 countries around the world.

guess I should have known the answer. 

"Fox News host Mark Levin debuted at number 1 on the New York Times bestseller list for his new book, American Marxism.

Washington Examiner reported previously, according to sources, that Levin’s book sold a whopping 400,000 copies of the book in the first week. The pre-sale of the book spent a number of days at number 1 on Amazon’s list of bestsellers, beating out books on the president of Donald Trump like Landslide by Michael Wolff.

American Marxism carries Levin’s argument that leftists are pushing a “Marxist” agenda across numerous areas of American society that poses an affront to the Constitution.

“The counter-revolution to the American Revolution is in full force,” Levin says in his book description. “And it can no longer be dismissed or ignored for it is devouring our society and culture, swirling around our everyday lives, and ubiquitous in our politics, schools, media, and entertainment.”

American Marxism.

afront to the constitution.🤣

lol. what a boondoggle. People are so facking brainwashed.

Edited August 20, 2021 by Mark F

[JCon]

4 minutes ago, Mark F said:

There are some posters that comment here referring to rampant Marxism, or communism in Canada.

Since we are really, in any reasonable analysis a corporate and business friendly country with public health care, I was wondering where those people get the idea from.

for instance:  

"In 2013, Canadian-headquartered mining and exploration companies accounted for nearly 31% of global exploration expenditures. In 2013, over 50% of the world’s publically listed exploration and mining companies were headquartered in Canada. These 1500 companies had an interest in some 8000 properties in over 100 countries around the world.

guess I should have known the answer. 

"Fox News host Mark Levin debuted at number 1 on the New York Times bestseller list for his new book, American Marxism.

Washington Examiner reported previously, according to sources, that Levin’s book sold a whopping 400,000 copies of the book in the first week. The pre-sale of the book spent a number of days at number 1 on Amazon’s list of bestsellers, beating out books on the president of Donald Trump like Landslide by Michael Wolff.

American Marxism carries Levin’s argument that leftists are pushing a “Marxist” agenda across numerous areas of American society that poses an affront to the Constitution.

“The counter-revolution to the American Revolution is in full force,” Levin says in his book description. “And it can no longer be dismissed or ignored for it is devouring our society and culture, swirling around our everyday lives, and ubiquitous in our politics, schools, media, and entertainment.”

American Marxism.

lol. what a boondoggle. People are so facking brainwashed.

Ironically, they can't even define Marxism. They have no idea what they "fear" except that the ruling white class tells them to fear it. 

[Mark F]

3 minutes ago, JCon said:

They have no idea what they "fear"

they fear that jeff besos wont be able to afford his own private space program, I guess. 

[Mark H.]

1 hour ago, Mark F said:

American Marxism carries Levin’s argument that leftists are pushing a “Marxist” agenda across numerous areas of American society that poses an affront to the Constitution.

That argument is growing tiresome, both here and in the States.

Somehow, every bloody covid restriction is against the constitution.  

But ask the people who promote this a few questions - and they don't even know what the reasonable limits clause is. 

[rebusrankin]

Saw complaints online about Trudeau saying that you have the right not to get vaccinated but you don't have the right to get on a plane and put others at risk. Complaint was basically that this was inflamatory and divisive. Am I wrong that I took it as JT saying its your choice to not get vaccinated but choices have consequences?

[Mark F]

21 minutes ago, rebusrankin said:

Am I wrong that I took it as JT saying its your choice to not get vaccinated but choices have consequences?

 

probably what he meant. 

divisive .... lol, so sad for them.

 

I want to be divided  physically, spiritually, politically, and any other way  there is  from the group that is unvaccinated.

for several reasons, foremost cause I want to stay out of intensive care.

secondarily cause they are dumb, self centered,  and  boring.

reminds me of the nincompoops that  invaded the american legislature, themn had public melt downs cause they were on no fly lists.

right wingers....."I will do anything I want, my mommy said so"

wahwah wan wah.

Edited August 20, 2021 by Mark F

[17to85]

55 minutes ago, rebusrankin said:

Saw complaints online about Trudeau saying that you have the right not to get vaccinated but you don't have the right to get on a plane and put others at risk. Complaint was basically that this was inflamatory and divisive. Am I wrong that I took it as JT saying its your choice to not get vaccinated but choices have consequences?

Ironic that it's all the personal responsibility types that hate when there are consequences for their actions?

[GCn20]

19 hours ago, Tracker said:

Ummm... extreme leftists like those who bomb abortion clinics, try to overthrow a democratically elected government, defy common-sense vaccination protocols, threaten minorities and so forth?

I don't deny there is right wing extremism so save your sarcasm for a rainy day. However, if your argument is that right wing extremism is worse therefore left wing extremism doesn't exist then I can't begin to describe how fundamentally flawed that argument is. Why can't you just simply admit that extremism exists on both sides of the political spectrum? Are you seriously that biased?

[JCon]

6 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

I don't deny there is right wing extremism so save your sarcasm for a rainy day. However, if your argument is that right wing extremism is worse therefore left wing extremism doesn't exist then I can't begin to describe how fundamentally flawed that argument is. Why can't you just simply admit that extremism exists on both sides of the political spectrum? Are you seriously that biased?

All that was asked is examples. Both sides, both sides, both sides. 

[Tracker]

45 minutes ago, JCon said:

All that was asked is examples. Both sides, both sides, both sides. 

Heck, I would accept examples slagging the left only. 

[Mark H.]

Political Spectrum 101: the extreme left and the extreme right are the same thing

Let's use the famous cows analogy:

Centre: you have two cows, you sell one of them and buy a bull

Extreme Left: you have two cows.  The government takes them from you, hires you to milk them, and might give you some of the milk.

Extreme Right: you have two cows.  The government forces you to sell one of them, and tells you exactly which bull you are going to buy with the money. 

They are both just different forms of control, and both have their extremist followers

But hey, don't take my word for it.  The most obvious examples are Nazi Germany (extreme right) and Communist Russia (extreme left)

 

[Goalie]

People need to go vote and vote me for prime Minister and me for premier. 

 

Just write other with your provided sanitized pen and write me 

 

If everyone wrote me... it would be funny.

 

Make it go viral. I can't as Twitter and Facebook are censoring pricks so.. yes #VoteMeMB 

Edited August 20, 2021 by Goalie

[Tracker]

3 hours ago, Mark H. said:

Political Spectrum 101: the extreme left and the extreme right are the same thing

Let's use the famous cows analogy:

Centre: you have two cows, you sell one of them and buy a bull

Extreme Left: you have two cows.  The government takes them from you, hires you to milk them, and might give you some of the milk.

Extreme Right: you have two cows.  The government forces you to sell one of them, and tells you exactly which bull you are going to buy with the money. 

They are both just different forms of control, and both have their extremist followers

But hey, don't take my word for it.  The most obvious examples are Nazi Germany (extreme right) and Communist Russia (extreme left)

 

I disagree with your identifying Communist Russia as leftist. They are an oligarchy which wears the cloak of a socialist  state. The  closest examples to socialist societies as designed by Marx, Engels and Trotsky would be Hutterite communities, and many aboriginal societies prior to contact with Occidental influences.

[Mark H.]

36 minutes ago, Tracker said:

I disagree with your identifying Communist Russia as leftist. They are an oligarchy which wears the cloak of a socialist  state. The  closest examples to socialist societies as designed by Marx, Engels and Trotsky would be Hutterite communities, and many aboriginal societies prior to contact with Occidental influences.

I'm referring to what happened once Stalin was in charge. They were the extreme left.  The government (a small group of people) controlled everything, far beyond the socialism of Marx. There was no free enterprise whatsoever. 

[Tracker]

6 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

I'm referring to what happened once Stalin was in charge. They were the extreme left.  The government (a small group of people) controlled everything, far beyond the socialism of Marx. There was no free enterprise whatsoever. 

As of Stalin's rise to power, Russia could no longer be legitimately described as socialist/leftist, thus cannot be cited as an example of socialist extremism.

[Mark H.]

1 hour ago, Tracker said:

As of Stalin's rise to power, Russia could no longer be legitimately described as socialist/leftist, thus cannot be cited as an example of socialist extremism.

Then let's hear your example of extreme socialism.

[Rich]

1 hour ago, Tracker said:

As of Stalin's rise to power, Russia could no longer be legitimately described as socialist/leftist, thus cannot be cited as an example of socialist extremism.

But this is the exact danger that extreme left / socialism / communism leads to.  You can't simply dismiss it because it isn't your vision of leftist or socialism.  By that rationale any person on the right can dismiss any extreme right groups and actions because it no longer fits their definition of conservatism.  That is foolish and leads to repeating history.

How many examples have there been where the thought was simply "Yeah, but no one has done communism properly, but this time...."

The extreme version of the left leads to centralized planning to direct and distribute the production of goods equitably to a society, which cannot be done on a mass scale, and inevitably giving that type of power to limited people will lead to at best corruption and at worse the deaths and starvation of hundreds of millions of people.

I have no doubt that every communist state was started with the best of intentions.  But those people were dead and killed very early.  If you haven't read it, this book is an enlightening read.

https://www.amazon.ca/Gulag-Archipelago-Aleksandr-Solzhenitsyn/dp/1843430851/ref=sr_1_2?crid=3C4R8YNGQT7Q7&dchild=1&keywords=alexander+solzhenitsyn&qid=1629513724&sprefix=alexander+s%2Caps%2C209&sr=8-2

[17to85]

Problem with communism is that people by nature are greedy fucks who will **** each other over for personal gain.

[Tracker]

10 hours ago, Rich said:

But this is the exact danger that extreme left / socialism / communism leads to.  You can't simply dismiss it because it isn't your vision of leftist or socialism.  By that rationale any person on the right can dismiss any extreme right groups and actions because it no longer fits their definition of conservatism.  That is foolish and leads to repeating history.

How many examples have there been where the thought was simply "Yeah, but no one has done communism properly, but this time...."

The extreme version of the left leads to centralized planning to direct and distribute the production of goods equitably to a society, which cannot be done on a mass scale, and inevitably giving that type of power to limited people will lead to at best corruption and at worse the deaths and starvation of hundreds of millions of people.

I have no doubt that every communist state was started with the best of intentions.  But those people were dead and killed very early.  If you haven't read it, this book is an enlightening read.

https://www.amazon.ca/Gulag-Archipelago-Aleksandr-Solzhenitsyn/dp/1843430851/ref=sr_1_2?crid=3C4R8YNGQT7Q7&dchild=1&keywords=alexander+solzhenitsyn&qid=1629513724&sprefix=alexander+s%2Caps%2C209&sr=8-2

If I follow your line of thought, then democracy is flawed because it led to Donald Trump- would be dictator. Any system of government can be corrupted, and most have been. Once you get into rigidly controlled, centralized governmental or industrial control of the processes of society, then you have problems. The concepts of Marx/Engels/Trotsky was that local processes ought to be controlled by localized committees and national processes such as manufacturing, defence, resource extraction, energy production, and distribution ought to be under the control of a democratically elected government.  Stalin absolu. tely corrupted these concepts. You can argue that it was out of necessity due to the attempted interventions of America (yes, they invaded Russia) and Britain and the looming war with Germany plus the deeply entrenched tsarist interests, but after these were over, things got worse in Russia. Those in power almost always (literally) fight to keep it- one of the few exceptions being Garibaldi in Italy. 

[Mark F]

8 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Problem with communism is that people by nature are greedy fucks who will **** each other over for personal gain.

what system is there that can control human greed?

there isnt one.

maybe when people were hunter gatherers they are more equitable. 

humans celebrate greed.

the great buildings, I think, are monuments to greed. the history we write about, is the history of war and conquest. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 21, 2021 by Mark F

[Tracker]

8 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Problem with communism is that people by nature are greedy fucks who will **** each other over for personal gain.

Disagree. There are those among us who are driven by self-interest and the desire to aggrandize self at the expense of others, but the vast  majority of people are considerate and caring of others. The problem is that thise who are of the first order are abrasive and demanding with little regard for others, driven to positions of power  and very noticeable. When you drive accross a city, you do not notice the drivers who are driving according to rules- you tend to notice the drivers who are aggressive.  

[Tracker]

Just now, Mark F said:

what system is there that can control human greed?

there isnt one.

 

There are egalitarian tribal societies where individual greed is suppressed through societal mutual consent. In these societies, the concept of individual proerty is very limited and things that we take for granted such as addiction, poverty, substance abuse, familial violence, mental illness and crime is nearly nonexistant. The sense of "we're all in this together" offsets the sense of exclusion and isolation that are the hallmarks of many modern societies.

[Mark F]

1 minute ago, Tracker said:

There are egalitarian tribal societies where individual greed is suppressed

ok, but unless there is collapse we arent going back to that.

[Tracker]

Just now, Mark F said:

ok, but unless there is collapse we arent going back to that.

But we can take the best of those societal concepts and incorporate them, much as the Japanese incorporated much of western societal concepts but kept much of their traditional culture. Not that all of those traditional concepts were good, but the example is valid, IMO.

[Mark F]

1 minute ago, Tracker said:

the Japanese incorporated much of western societal concepts but kept much of their traditional culture

yikes bad example from what I know of their society.

or is their terrible racism learned from us?  no, it isnt.