Michael Hardner

Maybe they think I'm a liar. That's fine because I want to spend my time on here reading and learning about others' perspectives to hone my own ideas. I don't want to spend time with people who call me a liar or who post "you think THIS and YOU KNOW IT". Pretty telling that they're upset that I won't play with them and they keep posting to me even though they're ghosted. Any of you will come off my ignore if you pledge to play more nicely.

1. Well, the thing is: -You call me a liar when I state my OPINIONS sometimes. Which is like me saying "I like chocolate" and you saying "No you don't" -You state that you only respond to me to call out my lies but you also add to my points and in fact don't always call me out. So am I a liar or not ? -You seem to think that it's ok to disparage my character and that I should be unbothered by that and just go on posting as though I have some obligation to you or the forum to put up with it. 2. "You should" means you're prescribing what this forum is and should be. I would counter that with saying "you SHOULD" engage in substantial arguments and not name-call. Furthermore my version of how this forum should operate is substantiated in the Guidelines: https://repolitics.com/forums/guidelines/ Be Polite and Respect Others Repolitics.com operates these forums in the hopes that they will promote intelligent, honest and responsible discussion. We encourage you to speak your mind on relevant issues in a thoughtful way. Please respect others using this board and treat them with respect and dignity. 3. I'm glad that you're unhappy with this. Given that you don't like how the forum works, I recommend the best thing is for you to leave immediately and never come back. I think that would be best.

Maybe ? I think maybe we have to believe we're better in order to affirm our instinct for survival, whether we acknowledge it or not.

You mischaracterize me as "hiding" when I just try to avoid you. You call me a liar. Do you expect me to engage with you ? Why do you want to engage with me ? It's pathological, as far as I can see.

1. Ok, but you spoke past my point. Peace between nations works if you have agreed-upon borders, hopefully those that align with cultural boundries, and a framework for negotiating and guaranteeing piece. Maybe I also missed something that you referred to "nation" and not "nation state". So, yes, nations are easier to stabilize than nation-states. But then we're back to what User said about things being conflated. Is Canada a "nation" or was in based on 3 separate cultures/nations ? If so, what does it mean to be a Canadian "nationalist" ? I'm genuinely confused as to how you could be a Canadian nationalist in this case and not a multiculturalist. 2. Right, but before the Westphalian you had regions in between that flipped back and forth, and before that it was more feudal than national. And the languages themselves had to be standardized as there were regional differences that were greater than today. 3. We're back to the contradiction and confusion User referred to. People don't want a central authority to control their lives but that's exactly what a nation-state like France does. The kings usurped the regional powers of the feudal lords and took power away from the regions, standardized language and made a "France". They they fought over borders for a few centures until WW2. You're not wrong, but if you state absolutes like "states are good" you're missing the fact that every form of social organization has plusses and minuses. Central control of regions, is like the power of the "union". Overall strength is there but some areas are favoured and individuality is reduced. Same thing is happening Globally as cultures are melting into each other etc. 4. So the Irish and Germans had to give up their culture to a central culture but indeed it happened naturally. Multiculturalism as a policy tries to preserve the character of cultures within Canada but is there really much of a difference between Toronto and, say, Chicago with individual enclaves etc. ? Sure, the government throws a few million to fund ethnic festivals here and there. It seems to me the purpose is to convince top 20% that Canada is nicer than the US and create more tolerance for immigration. The other thing you're missing is that authorities will tap into your emotional/moral sense to manipulate you to execute their agenda. Nationalism, good/bad guy tropes, etc. etc. will be put forward to get you in line with what they're trying to do. Not to say they don't think they're right but that's the way of the world. Using "good/bad" in our arguments (and I do it too) is a sign that we're under the spell of such tricks. 5. Right, so you defacto CAN'T be a "Nationalistic Canadian"

The idea that humans are better/worse than dinosaurs is an opinion, which is at best only based on facts.

Good for @Moonlight Graham for starting a substantial thread where we can have an edifying discussion, sincerely. 💕

1. Ah, well.... Maybe 🤔. I'm not going to say that you're outright WRONG but I am pretty sure it would be a long and interesting debate. Also hard to prove because it happened as a result of other civilizing forces. I don't think most experts would assert that point as confidently as you do... 2. From what I've read they're considered to have started with modern maps, The collapse of feudalism, maybe Napoleon or the peace of Westphalia? Again... You are so very confident... Even saying "almost always". 3. And the confederation of states to resolve their issues. That was an additional difference with the USA. And the states fought with each other, even militarily, even other than the great civil war. 4. So being a nationalist in Canada means being pro-english, pro-immigrant, pro-French. 157 years of high-risk failure, during which Germany fell several times, as did France.... I think we're okay But really, I don't think you've thought about what nation means enough, as user intimated...

Yeah... Some of the questions seem to contradict some of the other ones. And a nationalist is a different thing depending on which Nation right? Canada? France? Vatican city? Israel? I would say The Nation, as a framework for organizing regional peoples, was Frozen in time after World war II. They wanted to have a monopoly on allowing those things to be created, so they could organize them under a global framework to stop war , and encourage global capitalism and cooperation. So if you're a nationalist, you're primarily buying into that idea... That countries are a good way to organize the world. And you believe in your country, and their part in that puzzle. The nationalism that we know about is about a kind of tribal pride that's wedged into whatever the borders are that you believe in. Is Canada a post-national state? An American branch plant? A multicultural Paradise? A place where pedantic id!ots like me belabor such questions and talk about them to the point that everyone gravitates away from me, and joins other clumps of people talking at the party? Yes to all of these.

I root for team Human. Every Time

The last game of the season right? Amazing how consequential it is. The NFL is magic

Hott..

We're better than the dinosaurs, verily.

The Far Left despises the Democratic Party...

The circus aspects can be reformed. I'm talking at a deeper level . How they can be useful, even if reformed

I wouldn't be surprised if they took this strategy. But I don't see it winning

Okay, but I continue to be intrigued with a political machinations around such things. We also had an acknowledgment from an Auntie – Trudeau type that the mcusa negotiations did not have a lasting impact on us. I hope the new PM is up to it. I have faith! @Moonlight Graham sorry another Poilievre post, pro, I should try to hide my biases.

Ballast? You can go hot air ballooning solo if you have an extra 50-100 kg in the basket.

Toronto is tired of Trudeau but has embraced an NDP mayor - 59% approval. Maybe because she has promised a moritorium on evictions. https://toronto.citynews.ca/2024/07/11/mayor-olivia-chow-enjoys-strong-support-one-year-into-her-term/

Nicely done. You are correct, but the system we have is open and presumably open to change as it has done over the centuries. No guarantees of success though.

I would say that you MIGHT not yet a central arena for talking about the big ideas in politics. You might not. But there are still countries, and there are still big things that can't be dealt with on a smaller level, like: -Global geo-politics -Global security and our alliances -Global environmental challenges -Global economy At some point, the robots made of recycled material and powered by clean nukes will deliver sustainable and delicious soy-shakes to all of us as we laugh and play our lyres by the crystal clean waters. Until such a time as that can be delivered (certainly by Mr. Musk before 2050 though) we have to slowly transition to the utopian land...

Biden ? I don't have much use for him, no.

Move the bureaucracy and the operations of government services away from the parliamentary circus. People on the left hate it when you say government should be like a business, but it should be... Be... Unlike Bell Canada and Rogers.... Accountable and responsive.

Unlike you, I do not choose one of these evils over the other. But enjoy your evil. Hug it.

We'll never know the truth. Why did Biden try to ban TikTok and Trump wants to keep it? I wouldn't be surprised if there's open bidding on these people.