bleeding heart

Anyone who agrees with Charest certainly thinks there is too much of it; anyone who thinks "free speech zones" ("Orwellian" is an overused term, but this qualifies) are ok thinks there is too much of it; anyone who agrees with Britain's elitist libel laws has serious issues with it... .....and anyone who uses the generic term "protesters" to desribe the actions of some of the protesters is quite cynical about freedom of expression and the right to protest. You can't be certain of it; it's a literal impossibility that you are; but even if you're (coincidentally) correct, that doersn't make them automatically wrong, much less you automatically right. Hell, I have spent most of my life among the uneducated, and they understand certain things that a plurality, if not a majority, of educated folks simply can't perceive, presumably thanks to the indoctrination quality inherent to formal education within a classist and elitist society such as Canada.

Arguably, all people are greedy (if not for cash, then for Power); but not all people are always greedy. Anarchism is a serious and sophisticated strain of political thoguht, arising along with Capitalism out of the Enlightenment. Those who take violently to the streets under the self-label "anarchist," and call, for example, Occupy the "Enemy," are no more "anarchists" than tax-funded agribusiness (or what have you: pick your rich-socialist poison) is "free market."

No way to know that unless it were to occur. Unlike actually-existing knighthoods, which are objectively real, and objectively silly. Well, there is no communism, no capitalism, no democracy, no free markets, no anarchism. These are all useful shorthands, and never perfect ones.

And I'm surprised that Harper's defenders--since they are self-evidently folks of high principle--have not taken Harper on for these comments, with which only mouth-breathers and moral cowards could conceivably agree.

I think they think dissent is fine hypothetically, but they don't actually like to see it. I've heard as much about these "entitled" students who are "ignorant" and so on as I have about the behaviours that are the ostensible point of complaint. Two utterly different issues, incidentally...or not so incidentally. In fact, for these critics, any violence or other misbehaviours that occur are a godsend, because they dislike protests and protesters, and so find a convenient focus for their dislike; but all the other remarks about "entitled students" gives them away; or remarks about their "ignorance" (as opposed, evidently, to sober geniuses like Margaret Wente, and head-cracking police officers...who, after all, are articulating the doctrinal "truths" that our society needs no actual dissent....not when you can vote for this or that corporate Statist!) Only the poor and disenfranchised should protest, evidently...and believe me, if and when they do, the same critics who talk about "entitled protesters" will despise them as well; hell, they're already despised for their terrible crime of being poor and disenfranchised. But then, North Americans comprise an accutely class-conscious and elitist society. I think Canuckistani is right, and that this is all linked to the mass protest movements generally; and we've been hearing the same critiques of all those protesters as well. Violence and serious disruption has little to do with it.

I would encourage Dre to scoff at it, and he very well might. He has character, unlike Sir McCartney, who has only himself, his memories of faded talent, and his bevy of baby seals. There are; they're called "the leaders."

Fair enough; my bad. Now it's been corrected.

While I cna only ultimately speak for myself, it appears to me that the preceding three posters are jokingly responding to the idea that Mulcair wants to shut Alberta's business down.

Actually, I'm talking of people who aren't anywhere present...and who, despite the conventional protestations, hate the fact of dissent first, and the unruly behaviour second.

Oh, I think the self-righteousness--indeed, the outright sanctimony--of those denouncing the protesters matches anything the students themselves have so far produced.

I agree. It's silly. I'm sure Sir Elton John and Sir Salman Rushdie would dispute this, and opine that Knighthoods prove that they're freakin' awesome....but then, you've already answered that quite nicely, Dre.

Since the very thought of it made me chuckle...I'd have to guess that much of the reaction would be that of mirth. Sure, some folks would be outraged...as is their right.

People in positions of power have to suck it up, I'm afraid. As do their more sensitive defenders. I don't hate anyone. Yes, your caricature of my view is indeed ignorant and adolescent. But it isn't my view, so the point's not relevant. Not a woman with tremendous political power. I wouldn't object to someone doing the same with Thatcher or Clinton or Indira Gandhi or Benazir Bhutto. Not at all.

Perfect, no; good...why yes!

I know that "preaching to the choir" is an insufferable cliche, but.....

Well...that was a bit disarming, Claudius. Thanks.

I'm not looking for a friend, but I appreciate the advice!

Fair points, but...better some than none. Or, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

You're a prickly pear, aren'tcha?

Which replies?

Ah, so we arrive at the crux of your outrage. Nude paintings and statues of naked heroes traditionally have "tiny package," yes. If he had painted the PM as a porn star, would that have been preferable? Would the manliness of contemporary conservatism be more aptly delineated?

Even under such unprecedented communist evil as Mulcair, things will truck along as they always do.

Then Alberta should keep up the good work.

That's the way to go. Further, I have occasionally come up against posters who are friendly and accomodating when I make self-evidently damnfool statements, and I appreciate it. Not that I demand of anyone, including myself, that we always be friendly and accomodating. But now and then? Why not, eh?

To be fair, not all these folks believe them to be "red tape"; some think they are unreasonable "entitlements" gifted to coddled workers......