Moonlight Graham

1. The Peel Commission proposal was in 1937, which was 87 years ago. So yeah, past century works. 2. That's factually incorrect. 3. And you want a people filled with terrorists and governed by a literal terrorist organization (Hamas) that was democratically elected and that has launched non-stop terrorist attacks targeting civilians every few weeks for the past 20 years to have the right to have a full fledged military and able to import weapons and the freedom to travel to Iran etc for training in order to launch more deadly terrorist attacks in their genocidal aim to rid the peninsula of Jews/Israel? Sounds like a peace plan to me! 4. People who elect terrorists as their government, chant "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!", and are constantly attacking Jewish civilians indiscriminately because they are genocidal religious nutters aren't interesting in a 2-state solution and don't deserve respect or autonomy. There is no 2-state solution possible when 1 party isn't interested in that and NEVER has been. If Palestinians want a 2-state solution then they should start behaving and speaking like they want it.

The Palestinians don't want a 2 state solution, have rejected every single proposal over the last century, attack Israel/Jews after they reject every proposal, and would only ever accept a proposal if they thought it got them closer to their actual goal which is a 1 state solution and the destruction of Israel. Statehood would give Palestinians the right to build a military and rights to trade with foreign countries, meaning importing weapons they would obviously use to attack Israel and innocent civilians to attempt destroy Israel. aAnyone who thinks Israel would or should allow this is a fool. Anyone or any party who thinks countries like Canada should reward Oct 7 with calls to pressure for a 2 state solution is foolish.

Agreed and understood. I'm still in the the middle of a draft of a response to you from a post of several days ago. I will respond to this line of posts after that. It's an interesting convo.

1. Woke ideology has Marxist ideological roots and was created by Marxist-leaning academics and spread by Marxist-leaning university professors and students. We know this because they say it, this is not a secret in any way. Wokeism comes out of intersectional theory, which is an outshoot of critical theory (and critical race theory), plus postmodern and poststructural thought since the 60's spearheaded by French Marxist-sympathizing academics, and its predecessor "critical theory" of the Frankfurt School which was also created by Marxist academics. Anyone familiar with the social sciences knows this, it's not a conspiracy theory, it's literally in the textbooks. This has been explained to you before yet you continue to repeat this misinformation because the facts are contrary to your biases. https://www.britannica.com/topic/intersectionality https://www.britannica.com/topic/critical-theory https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/social-sciences/post-structuralism 2. I agree mostly. Yes China is largely pursuing their own foreign policy for real politik purposes and their primary goal isn't to make Canada communist, but want Canada to pursue pro-China policy, which includes influencing our elections and politicians in order to do that. They support the Liberals more electorally specifically because their policies more align with China contrary to the CPC and because the Liberals are weaker and less hawkish on national security, foreign policy, defence, domestic crime etc. However, the Liberal government has absolutely pursued many authoritarian-leaning anti-liberalism policies (ironic given their party name) including secret surveilance of our bank accounts, secretly tracking every Canadians' cellphone locations, online speech restrictions, irrational restrictions on guns for virtue signalling reasons, the longform census, and controversial COVID-era policies like the ArriveCan question controversies, vaccine mandates for all federal workers even if they still worked from home 100% of the time. Not to mention the PM's overwhelming control over policy and his own MP's that would give late-era Harper a run for his money. They also use lots of ideological propaganda of the DEI variety (new passport controversy), not to mention the socially Marxist/woke lens they use for DEI hiring. This government is absolutely culturally/socially Marxist-leaning. Not to mention the PM often disinterested in following the rule of law or ethics rules while demanding everyone else not associated with his party do so. 3. True, but with the NDP (who are Marxist-leaning democratic socialists and leftists) they have socialized pharmacare, dental, and daycare, but have used debt money to do it while conveniently allowing the Liberal's neoliberal agenda to continue unabated to the great benefit of their wealthy corporate donors and friends. The Trudeau's are undeniably Communist sympathizers and known to admire Cuba and are sympathetic the Castro's in direct opposition to US policy on Cuba. The Liberals are the worst of all possibilities: highly corrupt wealthy urban yuppie elitists who are communist-sympathizing social/cultural Marxists and economic neoliberals with some authoritarian anti-liberal tendencies centered around their "white knight" leader's own narcissistic cult of personality.

Do Americans want their corruption hidden entirely in backrooms or do they want it out in the open and barely hidden? Hmmm what a choice! #2024

Let's shoot for 50 million.

That's right. And this was how it was for the last several decades until recent years. We had made a lot of progress with just about every marginalized group. Good and reasonable people were honestly trying to understand and do what they could. People like MLK were venerated heroes by both black and white people, we had a common understanding and relative social peace (shout-out to @Michael Hardner), or at least it was improving over the years and decades. But now you're either a victim or an oppressor, every white person is called a racist etc, and it leads to divisive and toxic interactions like this: Many of the woke people and their ideas are simply out of line and take things too far. I've spent a lifetime doing what I can to help marginalized people and we were all doing it together. But if the people I'm trying to help are going to start turning the aim of their barrel at me, attacking me and my race/ethnicity, trying to erase my culture, and denying me jobs or school admissions etc because of my race then my choice is to either be submissive to everything they say and want, or I'm going to defend myself when I think something is unfair. And if I'm labelled a racist or someone threatens my job and i'm insulted and yelled at or whatever just for defending myself and my rights then we're done here because nobody should put up with that nonsense. Understanding and conversation ends and people are just going to retreat into their corners and growl because now it's a zero-sum game. Woke people helped create people like Trump and DeSantis and it was totally predictable.

Not surprising that feelings of guilt, self-hatred, and resentment of others is correlated with more depression and anxiety.

Chudocracy

What do you mean by this? Don't really understand. "Chud money flag planter"?

I'm willing to become Prime Minister and Liberal Party leader if Trudeau steps down and run in that election if they want to call me.

Well that was an interesting read worthy of discussion. The American Academy and "Trump's 10 principals for schools" iis pretty ambitious that people will argue over.

The next election is almost 2 years away. There's lots of time. Chretien resigned in Nov 2003 and there was an election in June 2004. Of course Trudeau could stay on if he really wanted but if he looks like the party will lose government why would he? The party would bounce him in the leadership review after the election loss.

He should think even more about quitting. If his poll numbers don't get better over the rest of the year his party is going to force him to quit.

160 prior convictions lol

Pretty much every packaged food is a steaming pile of garbage ready to clog your arteries in favour of shelf-life so they'll be suing for the next century it sounds like.

1. Yeah it's been dead since the 1960's, for better or worse. Moral schisms existed before, like protestant vs catholic, slavery and other issues. A big generation of young people plus a lot more mass media seemed to change things. Everyone believed in God in previous times. Now more of us get morals from our logic/emotions rather than our religion. THose days are gone. 2. ok 3. Well i think the values we teach our kids and morals about how we deal with problems in our society is pretty important. Are you saying you'd have no issue if Trumpism and chudism spreading more throughout our culture, our schools, government and then corporate North America, live and let live? Ignoring or doing nothing is a political stance on your part and which you're advocating to accept what is being sold to us, and that's your choice. And yes I do think it's a deceptive stance because it would ensure many of the political stances you happen to agree with prevail while feigning "peace and civility", and I don't believe that's just a coincidence based on my Trumpism/Chud hypothetical above. Don't underestimate the power of the radical minority: Yes foreign agents can absolutely be a part of things, but when morals turn into policy then you have to accept it or not no matter where it's coming from. Maybe some of the 60's revolution was a psy op fed by the Soviets. Frankfurt school and French socilaist academics and yada yada. 4. Why would I want Trumpsters and anti-vax chuds to prevail? 5. I think that's true. Most seem pretty moderate and reasonable. And then there's Black Dog and Shady who are addicted to twitter and knee-deep in the culture war and taken stark sides and want each other to die haha. 6. Sure I agree we need someone like you're saying. 7. Why not? Mahr has already had a show cancelled due to cancel culture, but it was conservatives back then doing it. He's got balls to risk it again. They tried to cancel Chappelle too but his career was too popular. Had he been a mediocre comedian maybe they'd have been successful, or maybe on another network. Netflix has been pretty good with the censorship stuff. Jimmy Kimmel isn't going to get cancelled in Hollywood for criticizing Trump or taking a pro-trans rights stance.

Hey Loblaws has put in a lot of self-checkouts to save themselves money, and theft has gone up, and so their solution is to harass you by putting in scanners requiring you to check your receipt LOL: https://globalnews.ca/news/10356789/loblaw-grocery-receipt-scanners/

RIP the dictionary definition of racism.

Don't worry Michael, if people don't hate on you it means you're probably doing it wrong. Even Jesus and Abe Lincoln and Gandhi and MLK had haters. In fact, they were all murdered by their haters now that I think about it. Trump and Jordan Peterson are also loved and hated by many. So I guess who is right morally is all in the eye of the beholder. A world where we all agree means nobody is thinking, just complying.

1. "Extreme" sounds more extreme. 2. People don't agree here because they have different morality. A common morality isn't going to happen anyways, it hasn't existed in centuries if ever, and now the crazy people are too crazy and they've seemingly grown in numbers over the last 10 years. Getting the Trumpsters and wokesters to agree is impossible. Getting the wokesters and moderates I.e. Bill Maher to agree is probably not even going to happen. So we're left with the realm of politics: a struggle for power. A battleground for morality. The culture war. It's on tv, in our schools, workplaces, almost everywhere. If people want to change society, whether banning Muslim immigrants and making Trump a dictator OR making society a bastion of woke hyper-sensitivity then the only way to defeat them is to 1. Convince them why they're wrong, or 2. If that fails, stop them any other legal and ethical way possible. My aim is to do both. But I'm not looking for cultural peace if they're only looking for culture war. If I need to meet them in the field to defeat them I will. But I'm scared of being canceled for it like most are, nobody wants to lose their job or lose friends etc, so I and others have to tread lightly. Anonymous msg boards and social media are tools here. But what we need are people brave enough to risk being canceled and stand up to the woke cancel culture mob. Bill Maher and Jordan Peterson and Dr Phil are examples, even if we don't always agree, but at least they're trying. It doesn't take much risk to virtue signal wokeness and go along with the woke moral bullies compared to standing up to them. Standing up to Trumpsters is easy, they do it every night on late night TV to great applause. That's why the woke have an advantage: feigning moral high ground, calling people racist etc, and getting people canceled for it.

Wokeism isn't just marginal though. The US and Canada are run by woke governments. The VP of the US was a diversity hire. DEI has crept into most large organizations throughout North America. The point of highlighting the marginal stories is to speak out against it so that it doesn't become a norm. Not every school has removed certain books from their curriculum for silly woke censorship reasons, but give it 5-10 years and most of them might if people don't speak up. And "trans rights are valid" doesn't get into any context, it isn't black and white as you framed it. There are many issues and rights to be discussed because there can be reasonable and unreasonable trans rights. Washrooms at Walmart are everyone's business because every woman uses them and every man's wife and daughter and sister and mother does too. It's a public issue. Again you're asking people to be quiet about something that affects them because you want that policy to be implemented. That's not going to happen. You need to accept that not everyone agrees with you. I'm not even that interested in a unity figure because someone is going to disagree with them anyways. The left now hates Bill Maher because being moderate and reasonable isn't being woke and radical like they are. What I'm interested in is bad radical ideas being defeated and not having power.

Well a lot of young men like Jordan Peterson. But the young left are the ones that seem to resent the boomers, because boomers don't think like they do because boomers aren't insane. The younger generations are brats. That's the way its been since post WW2 though. Dr Phil has made a career putting young brats in their place on his show. But the brats not on his show aren't going to listen. The only person young crazy people will listen to is another young crazy person.

@Michael HardnerMaher is anti Trump and anti woke. We need a lot more of that. That's how we can unify, around reasonable ideas.

I like most of what Dr Phil has to say politically. Musicians and actors.... meh. At least we have Bill Maher.