Trudeau dictatorship was seen coming 7 years ago, by the Huffington Post

[timothyu]

believe that these protests were beloved throughout Canada. Wronggo.

Well you would be right if you take into consideration an anxiety ridden generation might not like the idea of a shake up in anything including government (their concern being ability to go for a latte unblocked or their sensitivities being offended by an air horn) but the rest of us like it when there is a shake up concerning government or the status quo. Just gentle reminders power is not as powerful as it thinks and shows it's hypocrisy when it's benevolent face is exposed for what it really is, one of anger at anyone who dares question it.

 

[Aldebaran]

Depending on how you define unite. 90% of workers United to get the vaccine so 10% does not seem impressive.

As for union rep in the states, I know. It's a great reason vast amounts of Americans are financially suffering. Once upon a time unions protected living wages and guess what, they still do.
Nonunion workers had weekly earnings 81 percent of union members in 2019 : The Economics Daily : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Also, and let's really consider this..
A growing number of Americans want to join a union

So let's not pretend that unions are undesirable by workers.

Unions are undesirable by people who would not be able to afford that 7th house in Nantucket and the politicians that they finance.

Do not hold onto the idea that unions are unpopular

I've seen what unions do. I used to work in a place as a non-union worker surrounded by union workers. I was sub contracted. The union people hardly did any work, and were still protected from firing. Hardly anything got done, but they got paid handsomely--until the company could no longer afford to pay people who wouldn't work, and ended up selling the company to another owner who ended up going through the same deal, and then sold it again. The pattern continues.
So it might be great for the employees, who in this case are difficult to call "workers", but what good is it ultimately if it drives the company out of business?

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'm thinking unless there is money coming in, celebrity or likes on the web, that we will just have to wait until the next time they are needed for some elitist cause.

I can't be so cynical as to describe every cause championed by the left in the past 100 years as elitist.

A lot of people at the beginning of the 1900s didn't have equal rights. A lot of the steps taken to get them equal rights were taken by the left. It makes sense if you were born in the past 50 years...that's what you see the left as....a champion of the downtrodden.

That's not to say they are always right...it suggests none ever need a troddening.

They don't really understand the right. The right sees itself as standing for "normative cultural values" and the least imposition of government necessary for the wellbeing of the people.

Now, normative cultural values tended to stand for christian values...and I'm not going to go into the issues with that...because frankly, I think we're seeing the effects of not having any normative cultural values on the party....and it's not pretty.

If the party is built on standing up for the oppressed....there's huge problems with this.
1. You need to have oppression...always. Without actual oppression, you have to tell people it's coming (which is difficult) or convince them it's there....it's just harder to see (actual oppression tends to be blatantly obvious, not hidden).

2. You can't really solve the oppression....if you did, then you better create more oppression or you're back to #1. The result is an increasingly ridiculous or vague or frankly...bigoted political argument that takes up too much space.

Examples.

Ridiculous- arguing that cars are sexist because crash test dummies are based on "male" bodies....and 5 years later declaring there's basically no difference between male and female bodies and no reason why they can't compete against each other in sports. The same group of people made these arguments.

Vague- really anything regarding left wing racial politics. Try digging down on privilege and you'll hear things like "earned and unearned privilege"...and they don't really know the difference either lol. In fact, it doesn't seem to make any difference, since their solution to whatever problems these vague concepts describe (they don't know what the problem is either) they want to solve....by handing people unearned privileges. Make sense of that.

3. Lacking any coherent explanation for policies they now revert to explanations that have to do with appealing to the innate racism of their constituents? Don't see anyone in movie that looks like you? They'll get right on it. Teacher isn't the same skin color as you? We'll fix that right up.

That's pretty much all they do and I swear, they used to worry about real problems. Climate change? Nope....that's just lip service. Border crisis? Not happening...stop talking about it. Even issues like the outrageous cost of college don't have any real attempts at problem solving. Student loan too high? Degree worthless? You're a victim....vote for us and you don't have to pay.

I'm concerned about what will happen when they hit victim bedrock. I'm pretty sure it's pedophilia and they keep trying to sneak into the discussion....at this point, I give them 50/50 chances.

After victim bedrock is hit and fake problems cannot be invented....I'm pretty sure all they'll have left is blaming the other. I'm not Christian, but I am a white man so I am going to be teamed up with them.

Frankly, it's not going to go well. Truckers parking on the street accomplished something 4 months of rioting that BLM couldn't. They scared the government.

 

[timothyu]

I can't be so cynical as to describe every cause championed by the left in the past 100 years as elitist.

People forget or don't realize the left back then or mid 20th century is not the left of today or the last few decades. The left I was once on somehow became the right without me or my values changing.
As I said earlier "Isn't it interesting how the old right seems to have disappeared, the left of the 60's is now the right and who knows what the new left is other than resembling cable news and the me movement."

We once sought gain for others, now it seeks gain for self. It doesn't stop there. The whole world in the least decade seems to have done a 180. Good is called bad and bad is called good.

 

[Bradskii]

I agree it's not a valid study.

Cool. It would have been better if you'd found that out yourself. But at least you know now.

 

[Bradskii]

By the originators or the parasites who latched on? We watch Putin attack Ukraine claiming Ukraine was a threat even though Ukraine never lifted a finger to anyone. Trudeau made the same claim towards a similarly non aggressive faction.

I sincerely hope that's the worst analogy I read this week. But...a couple of days to go.

 

[Ana the Ist]

People forget or don't realize the left back then or mid 20th century is not the left of today or the last few decades. The left I was once on somehow became the right without me or my values changing.

Yeah, I think the left today likes to imagine it's own past as far less blemished than the reality was. Some imagine the right as racist. Some imagine the southern right as racist....as well as the southern left. The reality was that basically everyone was racist....it was just a matter of degrees. You could be a northern educated white liberal who fought against segregation....but you probably didn't want your daughter dating a black man. That's a more realistic view. It gets glossed over when we get these history rewrites though.

It's the oppression narrative that I find most concerning. Trump's cabinet was unimpressive not because of the cronyism or backwards views on some issues....but by the general lack of competence and candidates willing to work with Trump.

Biden's cabinet is oddly filled with some very bizarre people who hold some very extreme beliefs and it's all generally ignored or otherwise celebrated....because the important thing is they are....

A minority.
A female.
Gay.
Trans.

And they practically celebrate this as real issues and problems keep getting bungled and piled up.

It's hard to compare which one had a worse first year. I'd generally say Trump, but it's mainly because he inherited a better situation....not because of ability.

As I said earlier "Isn't it interesting how the old right seems to have disappeared, the left of the 60's is now the right and who knows what the new left is other than resembling cable news and the me movement."

We once sought gain for others, now it seeks gain for self. It doesn't stop there. The whole world in the least decade seems to have done a 180. Good is called bad and bad is called good.

There's an increasing politically orphaned middle that has no real representation. If the right keeps accidentally finding issues they like....they'll win big. The left seems unable to stop its self inflicted wounds.

 

[timothyu]

I sincerely hope that's the worst analogy I read this week. But...a couple of days to go.

Different outcomes and situations but from the same thinking. It's what power does. Man too if you want to admit people always look for someone to blame for their personal actions. Even Christians use a scapegoat.

 

[timothyu]

The left seems unable to stop its self inflicted wounds.

Especially when its fringe mentality calls everything and anything not fringe including within their own side, the right. I guess the Me party and the Everyone Else party wouldn't sound as good though.

 

[Bradskii]

Different outcomes and situations but from the same thinking. It's what power does. Man too if you want to admit people always look for someone to blame for their personal actions. Even Christians use a scapegoat.

Which means that you and I and everyone we know has that 'same thinking'. So are you and I as bad as the worst example that you can think of? I hope you think not.

Then how do you make those comparisons? How do you draw the distintions between what we would both agree would be a tyranical dictator and a democratically elected official who may well be democratically removed from office at the next election?

Slipery slope? Hyperbole? A honest appraisal based on experience?

Let us know. I'm keen to know.

 

[timothyu]

So are you and I as bad as the worst example that you can think of? I hope you think not.

We are in no position to abuse power. There is the difference.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Cool. It would have been better if you'd found that out yourself. But at least you know now.

Sure, I'll wait till it's peer reviewed to bring it up again.

 

[Aldebaran]

Yeah, I think the left today likes to imagine it's own past as far less blemished than the reality was. Some imagine the right as racist. Some imagine the southern right as racist....as well as the southern left. The reality was that basically everyone was racist....it was just a matter of degrees. You could be a northern educated white liberal who fought against segregation....but you probably didn't want your daughter dating a black man. That's a more realistic view. It gets glossed over when we get these history rewrites though.

It's the oppression narrative that I find most concerning. Trump's cabinet was unimpressive not because of the cronyism or backwards views on some issues....but by the general lack of competence and candidates willing to work with Trump.

Biden's cabinet is oddly filled with some very bizarre people who hold some very extreme beliefs and it's all generally ignored or otherwise celebrated....because the important thing is they are....

A minority.
A female.
Gay.
Trans.

Did you hear about one of the latest? Biden admin hires role-playing fetishist for nuclear waste post | MyStateline.com

This one takes the cake!

 

[timothyu]

How do you draw the distintions between what we would both agree would be a tyranical dictator and a democratically elected official who may well be democratically removed from office at the next election?

Again it is not who uses it, but how it is used. Which is the more likely scenario for the powerful, seeking to deflect blame in blaming others to draw attention away from a poor self esteem, or seeking to maintain power by blaming others to cover abuse of power?

 

[bekkilyn]

Did you hear about one of the latest? Biden admin hires role-playing fetishist for nuclear waste post | MyStateline.com

This one takes the cake!

It's one of many reasons why our country continues to get weaker. While other countries are focusing on readiness and building up their strength, our primary focus is wokeness and teaching our people (men especially) that strength is toxic and thus to be avoided at all costs. As Putin has only most recently demonstrated, when war is always a hairs breadth away, we really don't need our men turning into a bunch of Cinderellas. We need them to be men and have some degree of decency and respectability and a willingness to uphold the American values that have done the most to provide us with the ability to have all of these freedoms in the first place. Freedoms that may very well be gone if not cultivated and regularly fought for.

The fact that Trudeau met with Biden just before pulling that dictatorial stunt is troubling. The question is what really changed his mind? Was it the senate? Or was it the WEF pulling the strings for some broader and even more nefarious purpose? Did Putin just throw a cog into that wheel or is Russia a planned part of it? Whenever I'd watch Trudeau speak, he always spoke like he was on the verge of panic, his eyes wide-open and kind of crazy looking, which made me wonder if he is under some WEF threat of "get the citizens back under control or else."

 

[Bradskii]

We are in no position to abuse power. There is the difference.

I would suggest that abusing power means doing something over and above that which you are allowed to do. In this case, legal authority was sought, and granted by both sides of the political divide giving the government temporary powers required to meet the demands of a specific problem. And powers that were voluntarily removed as soon as that problem was solved.

That's about as far from 'an abuse of power' as you are likely to see.

 

[timothyu]

In this case, legal authority was sought, and granted by both sides of the political divide giving the government temporary powers required to meet the demands of a specific problem

Power only serves the needs of power. For instance today the country is clogged with protests over Ukraine, Ukrainian heritage being strong in Canada.. but no trade routes are being blocked. Hence no one in power is complaining about streets being blocked by marches.

 

[Bradskii]

Sure, I'll wait till it's peer reviewed to bring it up again.

Which won't correct the problems with it already noted. But how about a review from one of the authors of a paper that they used in their 'meta-analysis'? Tom Whipple is the science editor of The Times. From the same link I gave earlier, he said:

'I spoke to the author of the paper on whose research this entire meta-analysis was based, but who reached a diff conclusion. She said: "They already had their hypothesis. They think that lockdown had no effect on mortality, and that’s what they set out to show in their paper." '

We eagerly await some official peer review. Assuming it's ever published.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Which won't correct the problems with it already noted. But how about a review from one of the authors of a paper that they used in their 'meta-analysis'? Tom Whipple is the science editor of The Times. From the same link I gave earlier, he said:

Why? It hasn't been peer reviewed.

'I spoke to the author of the paper on whose research this entire meta-analysis was based, but who reached a diff conclusion. She said: "They already had their hypothesis. They think that lockdown had no effect on mortality, and that’s what they set out to show in their paper." '

Is she an economist?

We eagerly await some official peer review. Assuming it's ever published.

Yeah.