Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
26 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

That kind of rhetoric can be very frustrating.  People literally live in unfounded fear of right wing politics.

Eg. people believe Palister could/would take away their maternity leave.  No he can't - it's protected by the Labour Relations Act.

The more I talk to most people about politics, the better I understand why fear - mongering works as well as it does.

Dude just remember back to before Harper won and all the rights he was going to strip away.... 

Posted
Just now, The Unknown Poster said:

Dude just remember back to before Harper won and all the rights he was going to strip away.... 

Do you remember the stripping of abortions rights? The tanks in our streets? The Privatization of healthcare? The end of immigration? I feel like I'm forgetting more.....

Posted
1 minute ago, The Unknown Poster said:

JT saying “I didn’t consider it a racist act at the time but now we know better”.  Huh. 

Good thing the civil rights movement came along to save us from the 2000’s.  

That is the part that gets me the most. He's talking like it was the 50's and that's just how it was. It was in the 2000s! people were "woke" then too. 

Posted
22 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

JT saying “I didn’t consider it a racist act at the time but now we know better”.  Huh. 

Good thing the civil rights movement came along to save us from the 2000’s.  

Which is an odd take since, when he was ripped for the India debacle, he said critics calling his outfits "costumes" was racist.

Posted
1 hour ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Which one though?

I would take brown face 20 years ago vs having hand picked racists as his campaign heads and senior staffers in present day. 

We have a racist Prime Minister who gropes women for good measure.  Nothing you can say now about the Conservatives tops this.

 

See the source image

Posted
11 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Dude just remember back to before Harper won and all the rights he was going to strip away.... 

Do some critics overreact?  Absolutely, but the same can be said for both sides.  Remember how bestiality was going to run rampant after gay marriage was okayed?

The guy literally removed the word "Environment" from Environment Canada and "Progressive" from the Progressive Conservative Party.  Don't know why we'd be concerned about Harper.  

People today are disgusted by some Trump policies and forget that Harper implemented the same policies while he was in office (muzzling scientists, removing protections on water ways, trying to make it harder for people to vote etc.).  

Conservatives play a long game - you don't notice how your rights (as a non 10 per center) are slowly being stripped away unless you are paying very close attention.

Posted
22 hours ago, sweep the leg said:

I consider this episode of blackface to be more stupid than racist. It's still racist, but imo it's more an indictment of his intelligence than proof he's a racist person.

Totally agree. A grown man running around in costumes is not a sign of racism, it's very Michael Jackson Neverlandish.

Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Communism is neither good nor evil, it is just a system of government, and like any other system it's the people in charge who do good or evil things. Communism as an idea is actually pretty noble and I would say a good idea... the problem is that in practise human greed takes over and ruins everything.

Socialism is a great idea in theory, communism is just a mechanism to enforce socialism and is not a very good idea at all.

Edited by gcn11
Posted
19 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

First of all, Holodomor took place in the early 1930s. And it was a calculated move carried out by the Soviet Union under Stalin to combat an attempted independence movement in Ukraine at the time. It had far less do with communism itself and much more to do with Joseph Stalin being a power hungry, genocidal, totalitarian ideologue.

I highly doubt the ancestors of those affected would feel inclined to split hairs over political ideology when it comes to discussing that genocide.

Problem is that communism only works under a dictatorship....and even then not very well.

Posted
19 hours ago, 17to85 said:

you are confusing the principles of communism with the flawed implementation of it. 

The problem is that is the only way it could be implemented on such a large scale.

Posted
19 hours ago, Rich said:

I get the allure of the principles of communism, the problem is it has never successfully been implemented.  And most countries who try have always said .. yeah but what happened before wasn't TRUE communism, we will do it right, but nobody has.   You may be able to successfully implement it in a society of 100 - 250 people, but at mass scale it does not work.   In pretty much every instance the people with the best of intentions for the populace are either dead or in prison within the first few years.  Then the fun happens.  This book should be mandatory reading to understand the dangers and what has gone in in communist countries.

https://www.amazon.ca/Gulag-Archipelago-Aleksandr-Solzhenitsyn/dp/1843430851/ref=sr_1_2?crid=309F29F30CCWZ&keywords=the+gulag+archipelago&qid=1568921052&s=gateway&sprefix=the+gulag+ar%2Caps%2C171&sr=8-2

What we have here in the West isn't perfect, but it has lasted longer and has spread more wealth and improved the quality of living of people at all levels of society far more then other then other structures.  Is it perfect?  No.  Should we keep trying to make it better?  Of course.  But it doesn't mean the whole system should be thrown out.

As long as their are sectors of intelligent and charismatic people that are greedy in a population, communism is doomed to fail.

Posted
18 hours ago, Wideleft said:

The CPC won't run against Chretien or Martin's legacy because then they'd have to complain about budget surpluses

Plus with Trudeau as the leader, they don't have too.

Posted

We can sit here and debate ideologies all day long, capitalism vs communism. But answer me this question commies, why has every communist country had the majority of it's people living in abject poverty? That's not opinion...that's fact. For a system that says it will spread the wealth why is it so hopelessly ineffective at doing so?

Posted
13 hours ago, 17to85 said:

That's just it, the middle between the Democrats and the Republicans is pretty far right compared to most of the world. What they Democrats badly need is to stop trying to appease the far right and get a real left boundary pusher in there to swing things back towards where the rest of the world is going. 

Problem with that idea is that they would lose every election.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...