Hcheh

It remains an elusive subject however, I don't see how we could remove citizens of rights and protections.. That just wouldn't work *EDIT: however, I suppose tighter immigration control and more difficult citizenship procedures would be a start. That might have solved this whole "Khadr was born in Canada but he is against us" thing. His parents or relatives would have had to immigrated here anyway.

Yes, we do agree then.. By law, Khadr may be identified as a "Canadian", because he was born here. He is only a Canadian by technicality.. and we are not robots, we can see that he is not one of us, born here or not. Perhaps more than anything, citizenship should represent a core culture. Yes, it should. Assimilation into culture is the best and only way we can ever expect unity and true "multiculturalism". It isn't "white" culture, it isn't "black" culture, it isn't Asian culture.. It is just Canadian culture. Canadians are better than that, we have a culture that is beyond ethnicity Diefenbaker said it best: "I am the first prime minister of this country of neither altogether English or French origin. So I determined to bring about a Canadian citizenship that knew no hyphenated consideration....I'm very happy to be able to say that in the House of Commons today in my party we have members of Italian, Dutch, German, Scandinavian, Chinese and Ukrainian origin -- and they are all Canadians." -- John Diefenbaker, March 29, 1958 How I wish we could have this attitude.. Nowadays, everybody is too concerned about their past nationalities.

How very "American"... I am sure Jefferson is rolling in his grave by now..

Yes, some people were starting to get a bit ad hominid, but what does that have to do with supporting Sharia laws and abusing 13 year old girls?

LOL! are you serious? Bloody hell, the lady is dead.. of course it is easy for GOP supporters to wave it away as a "conspiracy" because they could care less about her.. That is out of line, messing with dead relatives

Well yes, I never said it was the "litmus test", I just said there are comparisons. Yes, I have said that there is so much more to fascism than corporatism..etc.etc. Fascism is quite ambiguous, it would never be that easy to use one term to define a fascist state

Yes, it is pretty clear that Layton has some socialist leaning policies.. If that is good or bad, that is another debate.. Socialism isn't very radical, it isn't communism. And yeah, Conservatives are not fascists.. that is out of reach *EDIT: I always hear people calling Bush (not saying he is a good leader), Harper or whatever a bunch of fascists.. They are not radical enough to be fascists and yet they still call those leaders fascists. I wonder what people will say if the country is ever run by actual fascists..

Well , on that sense alone, you could argue the comparisons. However, that isn't saying all towns and cities are fascists because of the other social and political factors that defines a town. All the political ideologies share and borrow different concepts from each other, especially ones that only started arising in a more modern era

Who supports the Sharia law and condones abusing 13 year old girls?

As the definition of "fascism" remains elusive, we cannot expect to find indisputable articles on fascism and its characteristics.. No, because it is only a possible tenant of fascism.. Also, just saying "towns" and "cities" is too ambiguous, there are many other features that can define a town or city

Well both the CPC and the fascist ideology are naturally right winged, so you could see how the similarities are possible.. However, to call Harper and the CPC "fascist" is a bit of a stretch I think.. Fascism is an extremist/radical ideology, don't forget that *EDIT: like what White Doors said, you probably couldn't equate the NDP party with communism, that is too extreme.. Instead, they equate them with something more moderate, like socialism

People do call the NDP "Neo-Communist", except they have another name for it.. They call them socialists

Well, I meant one condition was MORE progressive than the other. Anyhow, yes, the technical details are only concerned with the law, and the spirit of the citizenship is within the cultural values. That is a good way to put it.. However, I do think that the "spirit" is just as important, if not perhaps more important, than the technical aspects. That is where we succeeded and that is where Khadr failed. Sure, by law he is just as Canadian as me and you... but is he upholding the Canadian spirit? Does he share our social values and outlook on things? Sure he is Canadian, he has the papers to prove it - but actions speak louder than words my friend

As I said, this is not necessarily my view. I am just sympathizing with the thought. Sure, we are in the "driver's seat" (a conspiracy theorist would say otherwise ). The cats will respond to incentives of course, because they want to become the next president. So you have two cats who both want to be the president... and we are in the driver's seat because we get to choose who does become the president. So yes, technically, there is a choice. We get to choose who becomes the next president. However, what does it matter if we cannot change the actually result and outcome of our country? Sure we can choose whoever we want, but if they if they are really offering the same thing (that is another debate) then there is no real choice concerning the outcome of the country. We can choose who becomes president, but that is about it...

Yes, more specifically, the mouse land story was probably aimed with a more partisan motive. However, the concept is still relevant. Anyhow, yes, we get to choose which cat gets to chase us.. That is the point that Tommy and Noam has made; we are going to get chased either way. The mouse ultimately does not want to be chased by a cat. To some mice, the white cat may be more appealing, and to others, the black cat is more appealing. However, in the end, it doesn't matter which cat you pick because in the end, you will ultimately be chased by a cat. That is the argument of the dilemma illusion.

Noam has a point though. This reminds me of Tommy Douglas' favourite "mouse-land" story: There were two cats running for office to govern the mice, one cat was black and one cat was white. Finally, they realized that the cats were no good for them, so the mice decided to run for themselves. The argument of the dilemma illusion is quite plausible. Mind you, this may not be my opinion, just providing support for Noam's argument.

Yes Mussolini was the first official "fascist", but it could be argued that Napoleon was laying down the foundations before Mussolini as a "proto-fascist"

Yes thank you, it is as I have pointed out. I never called him a moron though, nor have I called his posts moronic. All's just supposed to be friendly debating..

Yes good point. However, it could be the other way around depending if you have a traditional view or a progressive view on citizenship

yes , I suppose obtaining citizenship is all about technicalities; all one has to do is meet the requirements and you are off the hook. Yes we are all citizens by "technicalities" because we all fulfilled some criteria and thus was admitted as a citizen. However, after we obtain that citizenship, we have honoured our Canadian nationalities by upholding the social, political and economic values of the country. We have succeeded in honouring our social values, and this is where Khadr failed. "Citizenship" should not stop after the obtainment of the status, but it should be honoured and carried out during our time as Canadians as well. That is what I mean by how Khadr has fulfilled the technical requirements for citizenship (as well all have), but nothing more

Yes, democratic rule could be equated to a mob rule - 51% percent of the population taking away the rights of the other 49%. If the mob votes to execute all undesirables, then it will be so

GOP supporters: *cricket*

Okay fine, you tell me how your genius little farm v.s. ICBM analogy is very plausible in terms of sharing similar economic policies.. As I understand it, you made such a comparison to show how comparing a fascist society and a capitalist one like the USA was moronic and far fetched: I made the farm and fishery one to show that it is not very far fetched.. The only thing similar in the farm silo and ICBM analogy was how it looks, the shape.. and I know that economic policies are not as simple as the shape of two different things. So please, how is comparing a fascist country's economy with the USA's economy dumb and far fetched?

no it's not.. both sides have redeeming justifications and both sides have participated in misconduct (as we said, perhaps the Palestinians have done more wrong than the Israelis). It isn't about the good guys fighting the bad guys here.. Besides, it is not very unusual, most world conflicts are very gray and not very divide in terms of good and evil. Unless, in my opinion, it is about genocide or whatever.

you initially said it was moronic to compare a fascist country with a country that has capitalistic ideals (USA) , to illustrate that point, you made an analogy. Now, I made the farm and fishery analogy to show how if they choose to share the same economic policy, it would not be moronic or far fetched to make the comparison. We could go on talking about the social policies of the farm and the fishery, but this is just about their economies.. I do agree fascists are evil though..