Moonlight Graham

Even if he's an engineer you haven't proven anything. Correlation doesn't equal causation. Your logic is "Computer Science students watch anime more than the average student, therefore computer science is teaching pro-anime propaganda in the classroom".

Actually I have no idea that your numbers are correct. Mine come directly from Harvard themselves: https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/admissions-statistics Feel free to throw around childish insults, it's just cover for the fact that you still haven't provided ANY evidence that the fields you listed have a rightwing political slant being taught in the classroom over the last decade or so. "They must have a political slant because because engineers are frat boys" isn't evidence. Unless you're one of those "math is racist" loons. In fact, if the most popular fields in academia were pushing a bunch of Trumpster chud nonsense that every student came out parroting and implementing in most corporate, NGO, and government workplaces you'd be freaking out and Hardner would be slamming it, as you should, and so would I.

44% of Harvard students major in fields of social science and the humanities. Another 30% take science and math. That there's no job title called "social justice warrior" after university doesn't mean someone isn't one. But nice try with this load of nonsense. Would love to hear about the conservative-leaning electrical engineering theory being taught at Harvard, or the patriarchy involved in C++ textbooks. A certain field being a stereotypical sausage-fest simply based on the differing interests between genders doesn't make the material taught in the classroom "conservative".

I don't think JP is wrong here, but I also agree with you that he's not an official expert in this field. Per the retraction you cite, can you provide a link, I don't remember this. Seems to me that his comments on compelled speech have been vindicated with the gender harassment laws in Canada.

That's nonsense. Nobody comes out of university as a conservative, at least not since the 1980's Milton Friedman days. They now come out talking about microaggressions, white fragility, patriarchy, and decolonization because that's the theory being taught in the classrooms and texts. I don't have any issues with anyone talking about those theories, but clearly leftwing theories like those dominate the social sciences/humanities while others are ignored or not talked about nearly as much. This represents the biases of the professors and students (who then become TA's and professors). The profs are the ones choosing 100% of the classroom reading materials. There's no "approved curriculum" like in high school. It's simply a fact that in certain fields in post-secondary you're almost certainly going to be propagandized to an extent based on the beliefs/biases of the profs. You can't rail against FOX News propaganda and then deny this fact.

2. Except for Justin Trudeau, i assume he votes Liberal

Housing prices and rent prices are determined by supply and demand. We either need to increase the supply or reduce the demand. Increasing supply is complicated, and probably not a lot the federal government can do. Regulations and red tape are probably more on the provincial/city level. On the demand side, the central bank has already fiddled with interest rates, which is outside the fed gov's control. Demand-wise you can also control the rate of population growth since much of it is based on immigration, foreign students/workers etc. Some level of gov also needs to reduce the incentive for housing speculation, i suggest taxes. We need to stop buying 2nd and 3rd homes etc as investments en masse. Invest in the markets, your own home, and your RRSP like people used to do. The people who buy homes should live in them.

1. Ok, some progress. 2. Yes they're all elites, but some more than others. Spending your whole adult life in politics is much different than literally growing up as a child at 24 Sussex and being the wealthy son of Canada's version of JFK and having Fidel Castro, the Aga Khan, and many other of the most powerful and well-connected people in the world as "family friends". Brian Mulroney's dad was a paper mill electrician, there's little comparison here besides the connections they both made while in politics. It's like comparing you and I to Prince Harry if we all ran for public office. How do you govern a country properly when you've never in your life experienced most of the problems of the average Canadian? Let them eat cake! 3. Which voters do you think share more values with Justin's Liberal Party. Young, urban, well-educated, fashionable and wealthy types that drive Tesla's and use Apple products for the social cred, or middle-aged plumbers who live in small towns? We can agree to disagree if you like. 4. Yes of course these are my opinions. Subjective opinions are typically supported by evidence and logic, and aren't objective facts. Marxism and wokeism and darwinism and E=MC2 are all just "theories" too, not sure what your point here is. And yes i'm comparing my opinions to Einstein's, jk.

Technically yes, in reality no.

1a. I never argued that. I'm not saying we're turning into a Marxist classless economic state, but i'm saying this government has been creeping to the far-left in some ways socially and culturally, using anti-liberal means, and it has ideological similarities in the moral sense to Marxism. 1b. That's not true at all. 1c. Look up what "equity" means and then compare it to "equality of outcome". 2. I didn't agree with some things in Harper's bill either. 6. The OP is stupid, we probably agree on that. 7. I didn't equate Marxism and communism, in fact I specifically used the terms separately for that reason. 8. Socially and culturally this government has moved the country quite a bit to the left. The NDP has moved us a bit to the left also with the federal dental, pharmacare programs etc. The Liberals work for their rich paymasters economically, while spending debt money to try to buy votes without the need of having to actually do anything that might sustainable solve many of our problems. 10. I'm not comparing the Liberals to the CPC here. If don't disagree with the terms I used to describe the Liberal Party then I'll take it to mean you concede the point. All of the terms I used were carefully and thoughtfully laid out, despite what you assume. Trudeau is probably the worst PM in the country's history and has eroded this country in a wide variety of ways, he deserves a lot of criticism.

5. You sound like a dupe for going along and defending all the woke nonsense. Social Marxism is social equality of outcome. That's what wokeism is. If you don't like the term "social/cultural Marxism" then fine. Call it something else, like "social equality of outcome. It doesn't change the point being made. It's anti-liberal nonsense. 6. Well communism is. Communism is Marxism put into practice. The only way communism can work is through tyranny. You need to build walls to keep people inside the country by force because anyone with any ability to make more money than the average person will want to leave. 7. They're still a bunch of far-left wingnuts. 8. The Trudeau's admire Castro's system, which is communist and authoritarian. You don't befriend a foreign leader and lick his balls for half a century if you dislike the system he enforces while thumbing your nose at your American allies who had a trade embargo with Cuba. 9. The results speak for themselves. Please explain how anything I said is untrue. To review, I called the Liberal Party "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." So if you disagree, please explain how the Liberal Party aren't: - highly corrupt - wealthy urban yuppies - elitists -communist-sympathizing socially far-left wokesters - economic neoliberals - have some authoritarian anti-liberal tendencies - are centered around their "white knight" leader's own narcissistic cult of personality.

3. Cites of the mentioned anti-liberal behaviour by the Liberal Party: https://globalnews.ca/news/4608105/trudeau-defends-statistics-canada-move-to-collect-banking-info-of-500000-canadians/ https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/canadians-trips-to-liquor-stores-pharmacies-tracked-via-phones-during-pandemic-1.5890563 4. You have many political views that are counter to liberalism and liberal democracy and our Charter of Rights so of course you're ok with it. Have you ever in your entire life cared when an authority treated you unfairly, or is your natural reaction to comply with authority without questioning it? Do you understand that sometimes authorities abuse their power, and that some people don't like that and choose to stand up for their rights, and that a healthy liberal democracy depends on this or else we'd still be ruled by the whims of tyrannical kings and queens?

It's not so much "Marxism" that's taking hold in Canada, it's the far-left moral philosophy behind it, which is equality of outcome, as opposed to equality of opportunity. Let's break it down. Leftwing politics is defined as such by wikipedia: "Left-wing politics describes the range of political ideologies that support and seek to achieve social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition to social hierarchy as a whole[1][2][3][4] or certain social hierarchies.[5] Left-wing politics typically involve a concern for those in society whom its adherents perceive as disadvantaged relative to others as well as a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics Leftwingers want to break down hierarchies of power that hold back those deemed disadvantaged. The way liberals have done that for the past several hundred years is through liberalism via human rights and equality of opportunity. Liberalism is the basis of our liberal democracies and is defined here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism It means "All men are created equal..." per the Declaration of Independence. Black civil rights in the US was based on this, as are LGBT rights like gay marriage and other anti-discrimination laws. Equality of opportunity means everyone has the same rights so don't discriminate against people based on their group identity. People are treated as individuals and equal, not treated based on their group. What the far-left focus on equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity. Marxism is morally based on equality of outcome. Marxists want a classless society without rich or poor. But when left to their own devices, people will naturally form hierarchies, including economic hierarchies, because some have different abilities and make different choices than others. So the only way to ensure equality of outcome is to by using force, like taking the wealth of the people with higher ability and giving it to the ones on the bottom. Woke politics is similarly about equality of outcome. Someone on the far-left sees women or blacks/hispanics making lower salaries than white or asian males and they automatically assume some kind of injustice like discrimination is happening, and there can be no other variables involved. Again, when left on their own different people and groups will have different results for various reasons. The only way to ensure every race or gender will have the same outcomes is by taking by force from the people/groups at the top of the hierarchy and giving it to the ones towards the bottom. Equality of outcome is a disgusting concept because it involves using discrimination to tear people down in order to build others up, whether it's deserved or not. Equality of outcome is anti-liberalism. It's against the very foundation we've built our societies around (liberalism, equality of opportunity).

They deserve it, great job they're doing all around

People paying high unaffordable rents is far, far more important than the extra income for people who can afford investment properties they rent out. Imagine someone caring more about people who own 1, 2 or more properties vs someone who owns zero properties. The high rents and high housing prices are destroying the standard of living of Canadians. If incomes don't keep up with rent and mortgage increases then people are literally poorer. It means the vast majority of other industries in the country are going to suffer because working people have less money to spend because more of their paycheck is going to to their rents and mortgage. No matter what, one group is going to lose here, and it's either going to be new renters and new home owners or current property owners. The richer group should not win here over the poorer group.

Demand and thus rent and housing prices would drop with fewer immigrants and foreign residents annually. They keep beating around the root of the problem.

They don't want to.

I'm shocked.

Blackbird you suck at science. "Since 1750, humans have increased the abundance of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by nearly 50 percent." https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/are-humans-causing-or-contributing-global-warming#:~:text=A net 5 billion metric,atmosphere by nearly 50 percent.

Political theater for PR. PP didn't even show up to the debate and vote because he knew it wouldn't pass

Per the title, when was this "fastest 2-month period"? Your graph in the OP is showing 2022. Do you have a link? Or did you get this from a reddit thread that also only shows the graph you posted? We know that we had record immigration levels in 2023. Are you saying this is still happening? I need details.

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.