SpankyMcFarland

You need to read more about countries other than Iran. Such atrocities are not confined to there as I have tried to explain to you.

I worked with a member of the Rajavi family in the early eighties and he showed me hundreds of photos of victims murdered by the regime, so I’ve been following this story for a while.

I’m not denying the economic progress in China but that does not change the fact that a regime which murdered millions is still in power and has never acknowledged its awful crimes. Imagine if the Nazis still ran Germany. I’m sure that country would produce excellent cars no matter who was in charge. Yes, the regime in Iran is bad but there’s nothing uniquely evil about it that justifies the hysterical rhetoric emanating from Washington. This thread is anout the US and Iran. I think the current belligerent American position is harmful to Western interests and has produced an unnecessary schism in NATO. Europe should not give in to American bullying on Iran. A country should be judged by its neighbours. Look at the Arabs, Turkey, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, even Russia. Where are the well-run, prosperous democracies? Given the innate talent of its people, I am optimistic about Iran but peaceful transformation into something better will probably take decades, while violent revolution could set things back for an even longer period.

I’m not limiting my comparisons to the ME and China isn’t exactly on the other side of the globe either - it borders on Afghanistan. The current regime in China has been responsible for more deaths of its citizens than any in human history. That’s a fact you need to read up about before praising the People’s Republic any further. Yes, the Chinese people have prospered despite their government (as they have everywhere else in the world as well BTW) but that does not excuse the crimes committed by the state there. Again, look at the countries around Iran with an open mind and you will see poverty, bigotry, mismanagement and/or abuse of basic human rights in nearly all of them.

South Africa is a dangerous place for everybody these days. White farmers are part of that reality.

People of every ethnicity are vulnerable to attack in South Africa these days. For example, the relative I mentioned earlier was South Asian. Nobody is safe, especially the Africans who live in ‘informal settlements’.

I don’t think white farmers are particularly at risk. Everyone is in peril there.

Yes, scientists in Russia. I thought you had a rather low opinion of that country?

America milk industry relies heavily on illegal immigrant workers. You’d think they’d be embarrassed to bring the topic up, especially build a wall. The US enjoys a surplus of 474 million dollars with Canada on dairy products. Still not enough.

America milk industry relies heavily on illegal immigrant workers. You’d think they’d be embarrassed to bring the topic up, especially build a wall.

Says a former Harper operative.

At least 685,000 illegal workers in the US agricultural sector and all manner of subsidies encouraging the export of excess product. I can smell the hypocrisy from here. One concession I would like to see - upping our duty-free threshold, one of the lowest in the world. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/de-minimis-free-trade-1.4801881

Hard to believe but...Trump’s friends in the US dairy industry hire an awful lot of immigrant workers and many of them are undocumented. https://lacrossetribune.com/news/local/immigrants-are-backbone-of-wisconsin-s-dairy-operations/article_7acae07a-ed29-557c-84f0-c4465de00e5f.html https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/08/24/iowa-murder-casts-spotlight-farms-hiring-undocumented-immigrants/1075320002/ So Canadian farmers are expected to compete against illegal workers in the US. Maybe enforcing US law might be an easier way to solve this particular problem than building a wall? I would expect to see the promise of action on this matter rather than any actual things being done.

The situation in Xin Jiang is impossible to clarify because of China’s oppressive policies but the Uighurs are definitely being badly treated by any standard: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-45147972 And the Muslim nations say nothing, even assisting China in its sectarian campaign: https://www.businessinsider.com/why-muslim-countries-arent-criticizing-china-uighur-repression-2018-8 And that’s just one story from China.

Like the BQ in Quebec, Reform had a strong regional base in the West. Where is Bernier’s regional base?

What you’re describing is fairly standard for that part of the world.

Politics is tribal and Bernier just betrayed his tribe. He could match what Conservatives might want perfectly and still most would not forgive him for splitting the vote.

He's going to get more votes on the right than anywhere else because he's a far right libertarian way out of the Canadian mainstream. In addition, I'm not sensing a Harper or a Chrétien here on the organization and work side, so I don't see him creating a viable national alternative to the Conservatives. There's a reason Harper constantly restrained his own party and kept it centrist - that's where the votes are.

My basic point is that I don't see anything uniquely wicked about Iran. Look at KSA, its beheadings, and mistreatment of foreign workers and women; any of the Stans with their vicious dictators most of us have never heard of; China and its minorities e.g. the Uighurs who recently featured in a UN report; Russia in Chechnya; Egypt and many other African countries; and so on.

That's one issue and Michelle Rempel is going to be at her snarky best on it from now on. Immigration is inherently less scary in a subcontinent like Canada than it is in smaller countries like the UK and France and tiny countries like Belgium. We've got a lot more room here. Economic issues will remain important and Bernier is way out of the Canadian mainstream on those, particularly in Quebec. FPTP only works tolerably well with two parties. If the conservative minority of voters in this country is in any way split then Trudeau will win big.

As discussed above, 'can leave' is very different from inevitable renegotiation and means businesses will not be deterred from investing in Canada.

Supply management is a tiny economic factor and Canada's dairy industry is minuscule. The way Trump has gone on about it you'd think it was a massive part of the deal and that the US had no subsidies whatsoever for its own farmers.

Looks like the 'US-Mexico' deal has dropped the automatic expiration clause for a review every six years.

OK, few governments on this planet support free trade 100% and we all know about the bizarre hurdles to trade that exist even between our provinces. What I meant there is that NAFTA has long since faded from being the burning issue it once was.

Coyne's thesis depends on the effect of parties on the electorate. I don't think it's that strong. Most people pay as little attention to politics as posible between elections. Canada's political culture is different from that of the US and is in some ways more like Western Europe's. Both major parties support free trade and have done so since Mulroney (notwithstanding some predictable opposition barking at the time of the original deal) so it shouldn't be a major political issue. The current NAFTA problems originate south of the border. I guess Scheer will try to blame Trudeau if no deal emerges but it's not a convincing argument.