Michael Hardner

But survival of the fittest means that the best and brightest end up on top. Such as Leon Musk.

You can do that on here with the IGNORE feature. It works like earplugs, and the Chuds and Maniacs hate it. They will even still respond to your posts like a crazy person...

Typical liberal. You didn't say how often!

It also doesn't allow for teaching the history of racism in school If the far-right government disapproves. It also doesn't allow for tolerance, inclusion, atheism and most philosophies that have developed since the Renaissance.

It's almost like people are calling neoliberal capitalist centrist parties Marxist out of intellectual laziness and stupidity. But you know that can't be the case. Such a puzzler...

It is a monopoly.

You're not focusing in the right place. If it weren't a monopoly, the operational savings would eventually result in lower prices. That's economics...

1. Well, ok but the governments stand and if they did, there was no military aggression of note except maybe Colombia whatever that was. 2. Ok. 3. Ok. 4. Ok. 5. Ok. That was separate states united into a Socialist Republic that turned against each other. But ok. I thought we were talking about China's demise impacting us in ways other than economically.

1. I think 'political economy' is a standard term though. 2. All true, but how humans wield power is clearly the important fulcrum.

"perhaps you assume that Communist dictatorships collapse peacefully of their own accord by Glasnost & Perestroikae very single time" I think I only have the Soviet Union and it's satellites as examples. So yes, that's my assumption. If you have another example, even a non-communist one, we can look at that. This is probably going to be an educational discussion for me, because I do not have what I consider to be deep knowledge of the collapse of political economies in the modern time.

Pretty sure most people here have never heard of Bassetts or shopped at Eatons. I was a door to door agent once as a student (decades ago) and I was forced, on my route, to call on the mansion of the Eatons... I was smart enough to go to the service door and talk to the maid, who shooed my skinny ass away forthwith. Leftism sure does pay well...

"Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were Williarn Paley of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Henry Luce of Tirne Inc., Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the LouisviIle Courier‑Journal, and James Copley of the Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include the American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps‑Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, the Miami Herald and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald‑Tribune." The CIA and the Media Yes, because the left wants to help the CIA so badly...

What other examples are you providing then?

It's not like the people who have seen their standard of living accelerate would embrace a return to Maoism If that's what you're saying, I can't tell.

It's a little bit different. Russia was our military enemy for years and is now threatening our allies. All we want from them is oil and to stand down. The West has invested in bringing China into the fold over 50 plus years. But they haven't been nice about it, and now we are pulling back. Their population bomb will hurt them, as will an economy that no longer is available to grow. They are not going to have enough of a market for those cars they're making. And respectfully, the Olympics mean nothing. Jamaica is a per capita Olympic overachiever for example

5 eyes... Our allies know that we are with them. One government doesn't change that

That's why China is in decline though. Edit: AND Russia... Thinking everyone is against us is as bad as thinking that they couldn't harm us. "Trust but verify" was an oxymoron but also brilliant....

Based on this, I'm going to consider the OP more filler, on a day when I do not need that. Thanks for saving me some time...

So?

As with Trump, I will try to keep an open mind when PP comes in. I think that a full restructuring of the CBC could be a great thing.

He's not Conservative, he's a faux populist. Calling him a Tory is a mislabelling, as that tradition ended when he took the leadership. There's no paternal, royalist nobility here or even a belief that the elite will take care of the peasants. There is him winning and then holding power as far as I can see. But let's see what happens when he wins. From his telling, he'll fire bureaucrats then sell the CBC and we'll all have gold overfilling our pockets...

I don't understand how a body of opinion would just end after an election...

It's non CONFIDENCE. I would agree but it will be a majority government.

Honourable objective. You need clear goals, methods, a plan to propagate and a name to lead it. Small steps. Reform did this in the 90s with no social media and a nobody at the helm...

1. You and me both. Here's what I propose... Put the time wasters on ignore, then every time you are bored, post a new thread with an original take on social, political, economic, or other relevant concerns for the public sphere. The posters that you don't ignore will respond and you will have an interesting conversation.