myata

New conservatives claim to love all "babies", especially the unborn ones. I would be worried by the apparent similarity. Ideology is rarely a good answer to complex questions and problems in the society, even the great loving ones.

This is a no: there are PR systems where citizens can decide who their individual representative will be (if their party wins). Ignorance is not the answer. And yes: Central committees, often run behind the curtain by unelected shadow figures, routinely parachute candidates over the local constituents choice, in FPTP. Ignorance is not the answer.

Is it the right question? Why not "what it has accomplished, since ..."? And not "how much did it cost us"? Italy is a G7 country, after being devastated in WWII. Canada was not. Italy has high speed trains. One G7 country, does not. Did you forgot what (democratic) governments are supposed to be for, and who they (supposed to) work for? Is it the citizens for the government, its pretty color picture book rather than the other way around?

As Trump's stooge Rudy Giuliani is hit with a record penalty of $148 million for lies about election workers, the essence of this point and contraposition in the American history becomes very clear: the cult claims nothing less than the right to make the reality itself with their words, free of any checks, facts, principles duties and obligations. Says Giuliani: “So I am quite confident when this case gets before a fair tribunal it will be reversed so quickly that it will make your head spin and the absurd number that just came in will help that, actually.” The more they are shown and held to account for their lies, the stronger they will peddle and insist on them, with the only hope that the tired and disillusioned populace would not care. If not checked now, this path will lead, directly and surely, to authoritarianism. Between this position, if and when the society accepts and adopts it, and the worst forms of authoritarianism there's no stops. From the polls it appears that a large part of the American population moved beyond comprehending that. For it, it's some sort political entertainment game, whichever button you push, fun is guaranteed. Scary. And dangerous. This is exactly how Roman democracy perished, and every democracy will degrade and fade unless supported by the reason and will of free citizens. Are there still enough reasonable and responsible citizens who understand what's at stake here, these days?

And how would we find that out? By infinite talking maybe, as always?

You are reading it in a picture book same one where happy beaver dances with a mounted mountie. I've no interest in discussing on that level of intelligence.

That's propaganda, see its effects in the plain light. The votes given by citizens, their own and freely are "at the expense" because the default duo should have owned them. Great stuff. So how does it work in your universe: is it the government for the citizens, or the citizens for the government? If I am a citizen and I won't give my vote to either, should be just thrown away by some hand trick?

You mean a functional democracy without engaged citizens? A paradox, oxymoron or just Canada?

And in this system they are picked by hand, not even by a democratic parliamentary party but a Central Committee of a default management corporation, often unelected and so entirely undemocratic. Like that Trudeau shadow guy who was running his matters behind the curtains. Tell us what's better and more democratic!

Read it again, slowly and carefully. Yes you can, I'm sure.

What a stupid scary tale.. who peddles it I wonder? Ever heard of a "coalition government"? Yes you don't get to rule singlehandedly no matter what you do and how screw up.. that's such a bad thing (in a democracy") right?

WTF? Central committees NOT choosing candidates? In what alternative Canada, what universe code? You are funny.

Not to mention, in this age of information and intelligence, hopefully not only artificial, it cannot trelate to democracy. No. A democratic government requires support of the majority of voters, not some dusty hand trick. There's just no way you can get over this conundrum. Either you have the majority of the votes; or, you cannot be a democratic government. Choose one, at will.

We've been through it. Yes it works in dozens of democracies, including those with diverse local populations. Yes it works. Ignorance is not an explanation neither a virtue. Nonsense, continuation of it, sheer and unadorned cannot be explained rationally. You have only one choice here: either to do away with it; or reject your sanity. Because it just isn't sane, in this time and century.

And why not in the NATO member Canada could it "protect its citizens"? China too? A smart job, buddy... just don't say it too loud, they don't know yet.

What a "landslide", again? From f@ckup to f@ckup, and how else?

The bureaucracy in Canada generally, and the federal one in particular is simply incapable of managing such programs within the contemporary constraints of quality and efficiency. Just look for the touted health care, in a state of semi-permanent crisis.

Another bureaucratic bonanza with a 100% or higher administration overhead to the taxpayer "for the poor people". Just go elsewhere for inexpensive, highest quality no hit and miss horror scenarios serious dental work. The well is not bottomless. The back will break at some point under the weight of the bureaucracy.

One can illustrate the problem with a not purely imaginary situation. The society is uncertain and split between the main parties, around 48-52 margin. "The best of the bad ones", heard that? Proportional system: the two get similar share of representation, and the other parties more votes and higher share. So the main ones have to explain, convince find compromises, bargain for support. Such novel ideas. In the FPTP its starkly different: one gets all the representation, all 100% in the pure theory example. Just this one case shows that not only it doesn't make any sense, it's just not sane. The only reason it exists now is that two, three centuries back folks thought that two is better than one (or, Canada style: just copied the other folks' stuff blissfully), and in ten or so generations no one bothered to notice that the time moved. Then they'll dance and cry about the fake "landslide" mandate and then, shove it down your throat want it or not, what, you "voted". One thing you can't do now though is to keep wondering and complaining why they are doing that and why it cannot be fixed. Here, explained.

No, the herd concept. With the emergence of abstract consciousness a detachment from the herd, painful and frightful can naturally translate to what abstract symbol?

I don't like tags and labels. If they are fine walking around with a label attached to them, OK it's their choice. But this is not a LGBT discussion. Everyone can have a claim to peace and security, but no one has the right to impose their beliefs on others, even if better ones even if that could be proven.

A good analogy. Totally different people with different ideals and principles are forced together by the sheer need to gain power: really they haven't much or anything else in common. OK three centuries back two may have been better than one absolute ruler. But a dozen generations on doesn't look like a smart or even acceptable idea.

More ancient than that, great ape herd genes.

And I'm weary of all folks who claim that they speak on behalf of an entire group. No, I'm better off with my own brain. There may be thousands or millions of groups, tribes and flavors etc in this humanity. Will they achieve a perfect harmony any time soon? I doubt that. But can we at least come to common terms about what's unacceptable and cannot be tolerated: violence; brutality; invasion? That's where the new conservatism is failing. They can excuse it, shrug off and tolerate it, if it's of the right kind. Echos of the past, or the call.

Again, this is a simple question: if someone behaves like Hitler are they a) a hitler, psychotic, violent aggressor; or b) a genius? Genius or hitler only two options, pick one what could be the problem? We wanted world peace here only wonder what could be the problem? ?