kraychik

The world is less free and less prosperous than would otherwise be the case were it not for the UN and its subsidiaries. Freedom and prosperity are the exception in this world, not the norm. The UN has done nothing to spread either, and in fact, has done the opposite.

Perhaps the UN can be credited with all the positive economic and technological developments we've enjoyed since 1945. Mobile phones, high-speed internet, cheaper automobiles, granite countertops in our kitchens, you name it - the UN did it! Let us all congregate at the altar of the UN for our daily worship session.

Let's assume person A is sixty-seven years old, born in 1945. I guess the world is better off today in 2012 compared to 1945 because of person A's existence. What would the world have been like without person A, though? It's a scary proposition!

This has got to be the stupidest correlation-causation fallacies I've encountered all day. The inconvenient truth for you is that the world would be much more fee and prosperous today if the UN was not around.

Actually, I don't criticize anyone for spending money on causes they feel are worthwhile. If American radical leftists who want to destroy the Canadian economy who masquerade as "environmentalists" want to support Thomas Mulcair and other leftists, that's fine by me. I don't believe any individual or organization should be prohibited from spending their money as they wish to express their political opinions. I don't fear the leftist narrative, because it's so easy to dismantle. Don't forget that initiatives to restrict freedom of speech, expression, and political financing are almost exclusively leftist in origin. I say let the Tides Foundation send all the money it wants to help the LPC and NDP. We need more money in politics, not less.

I have an excellent grasp of the differences between the left and the right and strong familiarity with political theory and philosophy, actually. Judging from the lack of quality of your posts, you're not in a position to be criticizing me.

The UN has actually worked against all of its stated objectives. The world is less safe and [/i]less free[/i] with the UN. We don't need "harmony" or "cooperation" with states and/or societies that subscribe to value systems that are antithetical to our own. We need to defeat them, not work with them. Unfortunately, the UN is an obstacle to the spreading of freedom and prosperity in this world. Your reflexive support for the UN and the leftist fantasies of singing Kumbaya is the viewpoint that needs to be defeated in the West. The good news is that over time, the number of folks in the West who feel positively about the UN and its mission is declining. I just wish that change occuered more rapidly.

You're completely ignoring everything I've said, which is simply articulating the philosophical differences between the left and the right with respect to how they value the individual versus the collective. It's not really controversial, either. Centralization of control and erosion of individual sovereignty in the interests of "the greater good" is a leftist ideal, where the supremacy of the individual is a value of the right. It's not complicated.

Do you really want me to list off examples of foreign funding for leftist causes and political movements in Canada? If you want to play that game, and it seems that you do, you'll lose. Off the top of my head, I can recall the Tides Foundation funding anti-business and anti-development leftist politicians in Canada, as well as whoring their charitable status to non-charitable causes. There was Avaaz (associated with MoveOn.org) trying to interfere with freedom of speech by running a campaign to deny Sun News a license to broadcast in Canada, while funding leftist politicians like Pat Martin who pandered to this movement to deny Canadians the right to choose what media they want to consume. Pat Martin's own words, "God help us if the neocons get their own network to bombard Canadians with their outdated ideology". There was also funding from anti-freedom oil-producing states in the Middle East to assist in the slandering of Albertan oil-development, which directly served anti-business leftist politicians in Canada by bolstering their anti-business narrative. I forget the details of this story, though. Ethicaloil.org has done a fantastic job countering these anti-business leftist attacks, however. Foreign funding for leftist politics in Canada far exceeds anything from the right.

Keep telling yourself that while you hope that Justin Trudeau and Thomas Mulcair aren't free gifts for conservatism in Canada. We saw that same arrogance from the left in previous elections.

The National Post joined the leftists years ago when it jumped in bed with the CBC. The Sun News Network is the only large media outlet in Canada with a decidedly conservative perspective. So they're competing with the CBC (TV and radio), Global, CTV, and the plethora of leftist newspapers such as the Toronto Star. Here's one of several interesting books I read that examined media bias in Canada. Bear in mind this was many years ago in university and the media landscape has changed for the better with the slow dismantling of the dominant leftist media establishment via the internet and the greatly reduced prices of recording equipment. The media is no longer as tightly controlled by leftist elites, which is fantastic. There's still a long way to go, though. http://www.ubcpress.ca/search/title_book.asp?BookID=2960

Anti-Americanism in Canada is almost a leftist exclusive. So burning the American flag to taunt your pee-wee hockey players and their parents from America while in Quebec? I'm pretty sure they're not supporters of the Conservative Party of Canada. Do you expect any sensible person to take you seriously when you question whether or not white trash in Quebec burning the American flag are leftists? Yeah, I bet it was a bunch of French conservatives!

I find it funny that this guy is trying to redefine what constitutes the left. This is pretty elementary political theory we're talking about. If you're not even up on the basics, we can't have a serious discussion.

The truth is that Thomas Mulcair and Justin Trudeau are fantastic developments for conservatism in Canada. I think you know what I mean.

Yeah, they're white trash leftists from Quebec. I say it a lot more succinctly.

No, the move to centralize control in the hands of bureaucracy is a leftist value. The main distinction between the left and the right is the difference between the emphasis placed on the individual versus the collective. So centralized planning is an exclusively leftist objective. In the words of Dennis Prager, "the bigger the state, the smaller the individual". That's really it in a nutshell.

Depends how you define globalism, of course. It's not a word I used, anyways. I was specific when I stated that centralization of control and a broadening of the scope and power of the UN while granting greater influence over the UN's operations to inferior states is a leftist ideal, which it is. The left is all about centralization and universalism. The only internal distinctions are whether the leftists are national or international in their focus and ambitions (Nazism vs. communism, for instance).

The right-left paradigm is very real. And knowing where someone falls on this spectrum provides a deep insight into one's core beliefs about human nature and politics. Of course it has its limitations, but its utility far exceeds its shortcomings. I think this is your cue to post a link to the dual-axis political chart where one axis is economic liberty and the other is social liberty. Come on, I know you want to do it. I'll let you enjoy this fantasy that you know something about this subject that I don't.

It's got nothing to do with economic class, some of these white trash might be driving expensive cars and have lucrative careers with the provincial public service in Quebec. The trashiness is their behaviour. It's quite revealing how you jump to the defence of anti-American leftist bigots in Quebec who seek to harass a visiting team from America with kids and their parents for a pee-wee hockey game.

So the "left" is now such a nonsense term that it is put in quotation marks? It's not my problem if you don't understand what leftism entails. Opinions on most political issues, and even historical narratives, are greatly divided along the right-left paradigm. This includes attitudes towards the UN, economic issues, and everything in between. A person's association with the left or the right, which is far easier to establish than you are willing to admit (you probably believe, like most leftists, that you're nuanced, complex, layered, and beyond such a simplistic label as "the left"), provides a high level of accuracy in predicting their attitude towards these and other issues. After only reading a few of your posts, I can already see right through you. You're far more transparent than you want to believe. I don't try to deny my ideological point-of-departure, so it's amusing to see you delude yourself into thinking you're beyond labels. Let me guess, you're "objective" and "balanced", right?

Tell that to Ian Thompson and David Chen, who are both just the tip of the iceberg.

Who else but white trash would burn an American flag to insult American juniors playing hockey in a pee-wee leg in Quebec? When a group of adults does such a thing, do they warrant the label of "trash", or not?

There is no parallel of anti-Canadian sentiment in America. American politicians do not score points by insulting Canada and appealing to a non-existent insecurity complex among the American electorate. American thought-leaders don't throw anti-Canadian rhetorical bait to salivating Americans. The contest for which country harbours a greater degree of ill-will towards the other is won, hands down, by Canada. Thanks to the Canadian left, of course.

Not sure why you're huffing and puffing. Signals.Cpl is clearly advocating a leftist viewpoint. I am accurately describing it as such. This has everything to do with the right-left paradigm.

No, my mistake. Still, your ideal scenario for the UN is frightening.