Online news comment boards. It seems ignorance is bliss.
- Thread starter midget-boyd91
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Name one politician who isn't.
Just so folks know. The Liberal Party of Canada has closer relations and ties to the Democratic Party than the NDP. The NDP is socialist, the Democrats are liberals/centrists, just as our Liberals are. Please don't get confused by the similar names, as that is where the similarities end.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
stegner said:
Lets see here, you are the political science guy who will no doubt shred any definition of socialist I give in order to make yourself feel superior. :
As far as the Libs heading left in recent years i figure their track record since Trudeau is pretty self evident. The Libs haven't truly been centrist since Louis St. Laurent.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 12,429
- Points
- 1,140
Here's a definition of socialist:
One who takes the hard earned money from honest folk and hands it out willy nilly to those who are too LAZY to look after themselves.
2 CDO is right. Trudeau was a socialist. Look at his record.
One who takes the hard earned money from honest folk and hands it out willy nilly to those who are too LAZY to look after themselves.
2 CDO is right. Trudeau was a socialist. Look at his record.
- Reaction score
- 1,300
- Points
- 1,040
Agreed; however, "name branding" is important in any publicly available commodity (be it beer, politics or record labels). Jack et al would actually be wise to jump on the band wagon. Having said that, their opposites in politics could simply point out other "democratic" regimes in history, such as the German Democratic Republic.stegner said:
Anyway, as for defining "socialist", here is one take on it:
Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer
and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.
The two most important events in all of history were:
1. The invention of beer, and
2. The invention of the wheel.
The wheel was invented to get man to the beer, and the beer to the man. These facts formed the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:
1. Liberals.
2. Conservatives.
Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were
formed. Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to BBQ at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement.
Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly BBQ's and doing the
sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.
Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as girlie-men.
Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy and group hugs, the evolution of the
Hollywood actor, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide all the meat and beer that conservatives provided.
Over the years, Conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by
the jackass.
Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their
beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare. Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of liberal women have
higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.
Conservatives drink domestic beer. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys,
lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, athletes, Marines, and generally anyone
who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.
Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more
enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Sure Trudeau was a bit more to the left (just a bit ) He was a socialist. However, the Liberals under Chretien, and particularly when Paul Martin was Finance Minister, where heavily informed by neo-liberal (or neo-Conservative) economic principles. Chretien was one of the most right-wing Liberal Prime Ministers. Consider that there is little actual difference between policies pursued by Paul Martin as PM and Harper present-day. Afghanistan and military funding serves as one example. Martin was the guy who hired Hillier, finding that they shared many of the same world views, vis-a-vis military affairs. Though Dion serves as a left-leaning leader, however, the deputy leader, Ignatieff is significantly to the right of Dion. Ignatieff is the academic who thinks torture is all right in certain circumstances.
I will offer a definition of socialism. Socialism is the synthesis of Conservatism and Liberalism. It stresses the equality and freedom espoused by Liberalism, but also the Conservative emphasis on the community, rather than the Liberal emphasis on the individual. Socialists like Conservatives also view society as organic and holistic. I hope this will encourage folks not to use socialist or socialism as a pejorative. Not all socialists are bad, just most
) He was a socialist. However, the Liberals under Chretien, and particularly when Paul Martin was Finance Minister, where heavily informed by neo-liberal (or neo-Conservative) economic principles. Chretien was one of the most right-wing Liberal Prime Ministers. Consider that there is little actual difference between policies pursued by Paul Martin as PM and Harper present-day. Afghanistan and military funding serves as one example. Martin was the guy who hired Hillier, finding that they shared many of the same world views, vis-a-vis military affairs. Though Dion serves as a left-leaning leader, however, the deputy leader, Ignatieff is significantly to the right of Dion. Ignatieff is the academic who thinks torture is all right in certain circumstances. I will offer a definition of socialism. Socialism is the synthesis of Conservatism and Liberalism. It stresses the equality and freedom espoused by Liberalism, but also the Conservative emphasis on the community, rather than the Liberal emphasis on the individual. Socialists like Conservatives also view society as organic and holistic. I hope this will encourage folks not to use socialist or socialism as a pejorative. Not all socialists are bad, just most
- Reaction score
- 4,310
- Points
- 1,160
2 Cdo said:
Our (Canadian) Liberals, traditionally - ever since King’s famous quip about the CCF being Liberals in a hurry, campaign on the left of centre, sometimes (e.g. Trudeau and Chrétien, pretty far left) and, generally, govern on the right of centre- as directed by the career civil service and their paymasters in big, BIG business. (Contrary to Canadian myth, the Liberals are the party of big cities and bigger business while the Tories – ever since R.B. Bennett – are the party of small towns and small business. The available data (from around 1940) are very, very clear on that point but, thanks to a lazy, inept (unwilling and academically unable* to deal with the data) and politically biased media the ‘story’ remains that the Tories are the big business party.)
----------
* In many Canadian (and US) universities, journalism remains one of the very, very few ‘honours’ or ‘professional’ or ‘graduate’ programmes that does not require at least enough mathematics to handle elementary statistics. One cannot get an honours BA in history without at least one math/stats course, but it possible to get a ‘pass’ BA and then a MA in journalism without having, ever, to demonstrate an ability to add and subtract, much less do enough math to do even elementary research into most subjects.
- Reaction score
- 33
- Points
- 560
stegner said:
Some of the multitude of political philosophy threads. Careful reading will allow you to see where Senator Obama (and leading lights of the Democratic House and Senate) are proposing socialist policies:
Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/20359.0.html
Deconstructing "Progressive " thought http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/64647.0.html
Conservatism need work http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/37454.0.html
Libertarians http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/45537.0.html
Politics with more dimensions http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/23744.0.html
Euston Manifesto http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/42161.0.html
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
So where does Mr. Harper fall with respect to big business? He seems to be a very good friend of Big Oil, particularly Imperial Oil, considering his intervention with respect to the Kearl Lake project. Given that Stephen Harper moved to Alberta, because his daddy, an accounting executive at Imperial Oil, got him a job with the company out west, I have always found the 'Alberta' and 'populist,' 'little guy' credentials that Harper claims highly suspect. Kearl Lake confirmed my suspicions.
- Reaction score
- 4,310
- Points
- 1,160
Look at these data, stegner. The Liberals consistently, often by a ratio of 3:1 (in e.g. 2000, 2001 and so on), got much, much more from corporations than did the Conservatives – and more big business money was ‘laundered’ through the “Electoral District Associations” (at a ratio of 10:1 for Liberals vs. Cons or NDP).
But the same data shows that the Conservatives are the party of ordinary Canadians – they got ¾ of their donations from individuals while the Liberals got less than ¼.
There is, simply, no question: Liberals are the party if big business; they sold their souls, lock, stock and barrel back in the ‘60s. Facts are facts – even if Liberals lie and the media goes along for the ride.
But the same data shows that the Conservatives are the party of ordinary Canadians – they got ¾ of their donations from individuals while the Liberals got less than ¼.
There is, simply, no question: Liberals are the party if big business; they sold their souls, lock, stock and barrel back in the ‘60s. Facts are facts – even if Liberals lie and the media goes along for the ride.
- Reaction score
- 5,522
- Points
- 1,360
stegner said:
Pardon my ignorance but I just googled that and can't find where Mr. Harper intervined......can you provide links, please?
- Reaction score
- 4,310
- Points
- 1,160
GAP said:
I’m guessing this, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the National Post, may be what excites stegner's outrage:
http://www.nationalpost.com/related/links/story.html?id=568536
In May the greenies’ hearts were all aflutter because the Federal Court had rejected Imperial Oil’s appeal of a regulatory decision that seemed destined to scupper the project. Only a month later the regulatory decision was made in Imperial’s favour. Harper must be on the take, no?
Of course, Liberal apologists never mention the direct interventions made by Trudeau and Chrétien into all manner of regulations and contracts – to satisfy the demands of their paymasters in e.g. Power Corp.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I am not denying that. never did, never will. Indeed I have read George Grant's Lament for a Nation and support his mediation. But your assertions are irrelevant now given thenew electoral laws. All the parties are on even ground now. No party gets money from big business anymore for the simple reason that such contributions are illegal.
http://www.elections.ca/content.asp?section=fin&document=index&dir=lim&lang=e&textonly=false
Again your assertions are irrelevant given the recent legislation. Also, Trudeau's been dead for 8 years and out of power for 24, so maybe it's time we start picking on people that are still with us no? But one last dig: Trudeau was also beholden to E.P Taylor (don't forget him). If we are going back to history, let us not forget Sir John A. Macdonald Mr. CPR kickback stooge himself.
Agreed. But are you forgetting Brian Mulroney's (Mr Iron Ore Canada) involvement with Desmarais and Power Corp. Fair is fair.
With respect to Kearl Lake, there is not enough water to support oil sands production at this site (something your National Post article purposefully forgets). This is not simply an issue of crazy fringe elements. Alberta has proportionally some of the lowest supplies of freshwater in Canada and major tributary the Athabasca River are already been stretched to the limit.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061113/wwf_study_061113/20061113?hub=SciTech
The Kearl Lake project does not have enough water without causing major ecological problems. Instead of letting the courts adjudicate this dispute, Harper personally intervened, something that is grossly inappropriate given that he used to be an employee of the company is intervening for. If Imperial Oil has enough oil surely than can prove this in a court of law no? I also suggest if your reading about Kearl Lake that you not limit your sources to the National Post.
It's easy for those such as GAP, E. R Campbell and the National Post to criticize something they know little about. They don't live there or really know anything about Alberta (or the health of democracy in that province) or the oil sands-so let's just pretend that people with legitimate concerns are crazy nut jobs or greenies that are in the way of progress.
- Reaction score
- 4,310
- Points
- 1,160
stegner said:
Did he? You have a citation for us, I presume.
Who was the candidate for Liberal Leadership that had to drop out because it was brought to light that he received the Maximum allowed donation from a liberal businessman, his wife, and his little kids?
Right....'days gonna follow duh ruls alrite...... :
Similar threads
