Gabriel

Hi Dave, Yes, clearly wyly is a simple person whom I will not waste anymore time on. I agree with virtually everything you've said. As far as anecdote goes, I've spoken with some American who speak negatively of those loyalists who fled to Canada, not-so-subtly implying that Canada is a "nation of cowards". That being said, these American I'm referring to aren't the intellectual type. I'm disappointed by the resistance that many Canadians have towards acknowledging and being proud of the commonalities we have with America. Many of our concepts of freedom and democracy are not just dinner table talking points, but fundamental parts of our lives. Obviously they have manifested themselves into different political systems, but these common broad themes are significant. Freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of religion, etc. Not many countries in this world vigilantly enforce these freedoms like Canada and the USA. We have many economic similarities, too. From property laws to our centralized banking system, to our regulatory agencies (i.e. FDA and Health Canada), there are many commonalities. Many major institutions that we are familiar with in Canada have a similar counterpart down south. The only part where I slightly disagree with you is the mosaic/melting pot concept. Although I do believe that Canada is slightly more mosaic-ish than America, I think both Canada and America are, on-the-whole, very mosaic-ish. Travel to any big city in the USA and you'll see many cultures represented. Deal with any large company in the USA and you'll see many cultures represented. There are private religious/language schools, tons of ethnic restaurants, HUGE amounts of special interest charities/organizations/NGOs, etc. The majority of Canadians I speak with who have the impression that somehow America Americanizes all of its migrant ferociously are simply out-of-touch with reality. There are so many distinct Americans cities with distinct cultural flavours, and of course distinct parts of American cities with distinct cultural flavours. All big cities have many cool cultural sub-communities - Latin/Hispanic, Black, Caribbean, Jewish, Arabic/Muslim, Russian, Indian/Pakistani, East Asian/Chinese/Vietnamese, etc, etc, etc. Although I agree with your opinion that we're typically more laissez-faire up here, I find the terms we learned in high school about the USA being a melting pot and Canada being a mosaic aren't reflective of reality. America, if anything, is more multicultural than Canada (although unofficially). Thanks for your reply.

How can you expect me to have a serious conversation with you when you make an absurd claim that perhaps Brazil is more multicultural than the USA? The USA represents countless more languages, cultures, religions, ethnicities, etc. The USA takes in more immigrants legally than the rest of the world combines annually (and has been doing so for a long time). There are no cities of similar multiculturalism in Brazil such as NYC, LA, Miami, etc (Toronto, as well, Canada's multiculturalism eclipses Brazil's). Either you're ignorant or simple. Either way, there's no point in continuing this conversation with you. I still hope other will make intelligent contributions to this thread, as I find this subject fascinating.

Brazilian and Argentinian multiculturalism cannot be compared to American or Canadian multiculturalism. America and Canada represent much more diversity, with significantly larger portions of our populations being composed of people who would identify themselves as minorities (visible or otherwise). Why are you debating this point? Do you dispute that America is the most multicultural country (with a handful of other countries being somewhat comparable, including Canada)? Clearly you are trolling me, I never said that the Canadian and American cultures are uniform, rather I recognized that our commonalities outweigh our differences. You are obviously of the camp that prefers to focus on the differences between these two countries, and I'll further speculate that you are one of those people who largely defines Canadian identity by how it ISN'T American. In all seriousness, I'm here to have a serious discussion with intelligent people and hopefully learn a thing or two from the worthwhile contributors of this forum. Continuing this exchange with you fulfils none of these desires. I'm not here to teach, I'm here to learn. If you aren't aware of the commonalities between Canada and America, then perhaps you shouldn't be participate in this thread. Go bother someone else.

wyly - If you really intend on having a serious discussion, why don't you ask serious questions or make serious arguments? You couldn't make it more obvious that you are simply trying to troll me. Excuse me for not listing the Roman Empire in what I assumed was a conversation in the context of modern countries! Perhaps when you travel the world, specifically America, a little more you'll be able to see the huge similarities between Canada and the USA in a global context. To dumb down the commonalities between Canada and America to, "we watch the same tv speak the same language and that's where it stops" shows just how little you know about this subject (it also suggests a thing or two about your politics/ideology). I'm here to have a serious discussion with serious people. Go bother someone else. And if you're Canadian, why do you need to me to explain the ways of our land?

politicslvr - How do you expect anyone to take you seriously when your bone of contention is the federal government's lack of action to benefit a Canadian who chose to marry a man Saudi Arabia (as if there is some shortage of men in Canada), have children with him, move there, and then complain when she is mistreated? She is 100% responsible for her own circumstances. Canada can leverage its diplomacy, but if Saudi Arabia refuses to return her to Canada, then there's simply nothing else Canada can or should do. I could be much more crude, but there is something deeply wrong with this woman considering the choices she's made. I can guarantee you that a woman who leaves Canada to marry a man in Saudi Arabia (of all countries!) is deeply disturbed and more than likely uneducated. Her current situation is entirely her own fault.

This is an interesting topic of discussion, and it overlaps with a theme I was trying to touch on in a thread I started entitled, "Cheap points that the Liberal party can often score" - found here. Canada has a complex national identity, and within it various provincial, municipal, and subcultural identities. Clearly a resistance to what is seen as "American" and a not-so-subtle hostility to Americans/America/Americanism is an element of part of Canada's political culture. Although I think this is an element of Canada's left-wing. I have always lived in a big Canadian metropolitan city, and have experienced first-hand the front-lines of Canada's multiculturalism. With this phenomenon comes strengths and weaknesses, obviously. There is something amazing about minority communities maintaining their language/tradition/cuisine/religion/etc while thriving in Canada. I know I'm not the only one in here who loves all the amazing ethnic food available in Canada's big cities! It is a difficult balance to be strike between the preservation of one's unique culture/heritage while integrating into the Canadian society as a whole. To address Keepitsimple's message regarding sub-communities that operate in a bubble, I also find this concerning. The preservation of one's culture/heritage should not come at the price of isolating oneself from the greater Canadian collective. If this impedes one's ability to learn English (or French) or Canadian values/legalities, then we've got a problem. I would say that overall, Canada has done a good job in managing these vastly different cultures (we're a very multicultural country) under the umbrella of our country. That being said, I think it's a never ending job which requires vigilance: Canada needs to stay on top of newly arriving immigrants and ensure that we are doing our part to give them reasonable opportunities to integrate, and that THEY are making reasonable efforts and taking responsibility to learn the ways of our land. Obviously there is so much more to be said about Canadian culture, but I just wanted to say a few things about how I view multiculturalism in Canada. Lastly, I'd like that add that America's large cities are among the most multicultural cities on the planet. Indeed, America was probably the first country to adopt a massively multicultural population. Actually I will add a few comments about comparisons between Canada and America. On the whole, we are extremely similar. Politically, culturally (or multiculturally), legally, economically, etc. Of course there are differences as well, we tax more up here and provide public health care. We don't have a history of slavery in this country. I can give many other differences, but on the whole we have far more in common than we have different. I'd also like to mention that this Canadian identity issue, part of it being our desire to differentiate ourselves from our southern neighbours, isn't unique. For example, former Soviet republics, after splitting off and becoming independent have experienced similar cultural identity issues connected with differentiating themselves from the Russian culture. The Ukraine is a good example. In a simple way, it's a way of casting off what's viewed by some as an overbearing neighbour, with an emphasis on differences and a neglect of similarities (even when the similarities far outweigh the differences).

I agree with you 100%. In a simple way, I think if Iggy hasn't demonstrated any outstanding qualities that resonate with Canadians (leadership, charisma, principles/integrity, independence of thought, an INTELLIGENT approach to any of Canada's federal problems), then this void cannot be filled by an outsider. Either you have it, or you don't. Iggy is clearly not a leader that can garner strong support for the Liberal brand. That being said, I think Harper lacks certain extraordinary personal qualities, as well. But Harper is clearly not as vacuous as Iggy. A final comment, although I am not a big fan of Obama's policies, I am a fan of his persona and his ability to connect with Americans. I wish we had a (conservative) Canadian politician with that type of charisma.

I don't know much about Peter Donolo, but I'm certain most people will agree that Ignatieff needs help in building a message and persona that will resonate with Canadians. From my perspective, Iggy comes off as painfully fake, jumping on any fake controversy he can in order to disparage the Harper government. In Iggy I see zero integrity, a wholly partisan childish politician. In order for Iggy to build support, he must select certain issues of high importance to Canadians and develop legitimate criticisms of the Harper government's approach to these issues. Iggy must then propose an intelligent resolution to these issues to build a Liberal platform. Perhaps Donolo is an astute political mind with a knack for keeping his finger on the pulse of Canadian public opinion, while at the same time providing Iggy with good advice on how to take advantage of the currents of Canadian public opinion. Lastly, Iggy will need to provide strong leadership on the issues he selects . That's just my armchair analysis of this story so far.

Although this is question with an obvious answer, I imagine there will be some folks in here who answer it incorrectly - Does the left-wing of Canada (politicians, journalists, common people, etc) have a dependable base of supporters who respond positively to anti-American (and anti-business/anti-market) rhetoric? Which of you out there dispute that anti-Americanism is a cheap and emotional way for those of the left to score political points with some of those on the left? I am not interested in debating whether or not this is a reality, but I'd rather discuss with intelligent people how this phenomenon has come into being, how it's evolved over time, and examine cases of it in our political history (i.e. inflammatory rhetoric from politicians or journalists). I've spent a little time looking for information regarding anti-Americanism in Canada, and have been unimpressed with the information I've found. Considering that for honest and observant people, it's a noticeable component of Canadian political culture. That being said, I'm surprised that more efforts hasn't been devoted to examining this part of Canadian political culture. Perhaps I just haven't spend enough time on Google. Maybe I'll spend some time on this issue and write an article about it. Just as an aside, I remember misrepresentations of America even as a child in elementary school, where I'd learn that Canada is a "mosaic", while America is a "melting pot" (which is untrue), that Americans are dumber/simpler, etc. It can get into you at a young age.

Molly, I do not need to analyze every single incidence of exploitation of irrational fears/beliefs/prejudices/etc among certain Canadians in this thread. I asked a question with a focus - to examine how the Liberal party (and NDP, and other leftist political groups/organizations) exploit aspects of political culture among some Canadians to their advantage. If I inquire about the errors of a particular Conservative politician in a specific context, must I then ask about the errors of a particular Liberal politician in order to appease salivating Conservatives? Of course not. I do not need to preface every single query of mine with an opposing query in order to please some other perspective. I am not interested in analyzing what you view as cheap political points scored by the Conservative party and rightist organizations that resonate with certain Canadians. Go cry about that somewhere else. Again, if you've got nothing to contribute besides making trolling little jabs at me, perhaps you should find something better to do with your time. I am not partisan, I simply wish to analyze a specific phenomenon which I've observed for many years. I've seen it from politicians (Carolyn Parrish is the first that comes to mind) and around the dinner table with leftist friends of mine. The resentment of America (its culture, politics, etc) isn't anything that's hard to find in the Canadian left, it's pretty overt. I'd like to examine it, as well as other never prejudices not uncommon to the Canadian left that's exploited by the Liberal party and other leftist groups/politicians/etc. Although it's clear that waldo isn't here to contribute anything worthwhile, given his one-word reply, I'll indulge you a bit. Do you *really* need me to provide evidence of the Liberal party or the NDP leveraging anti-Americanism? Are you THAT out-of-touch with Canadian politics that you need citations of representatives of this party disputing the opposition by comparing the Conservative party to America or Americans or George Bush (or any other American politician that's unpopular in Canada) or whomever in order to score cheap points by stroking the anti-American hard-on of the Canadian left? The list is ENDLESS. Check question period, check CBC interviews, check Canadian newspapers/op-eds. Get real. waldo = Here's a simple question, a yes or no answer will suffice. Have members of the Liberal party and NDP, for years, been exploiting anti-American sentiment (which is hostile/resentful and largely irrational) in the Canadian left in order to garner political support? Your request for citations (countless examples are available over the decades of this phenomenon's existence) suggests to me that in your view, this phenomenon is a figment of my imagination.

How is this topic not getting more attention? It seems to me that many people simply don't care that a billion dollars was fleeced via this scandal. How is this not causing more outrage?

Wow, looks like I touched a nerve with a couple of folks. First of all, I'm non-partisan. I would support any politician from any party who I agree with. Currently, however, I support the Conservative party more than the other parties, and if there was an election today, I'd vote for the Conservative party candidate from my riding. That being said, I'm asking a legitimate question. If you two choose to not participate in this discussion, then just don't post in this thread. I'm not going to be taking any troll bait, which is clearly what you two are trying to do (the pointless one-liner from Molly and the hysteric conspiracy freak calling for my being banned). I'm sure a similar question could be asked of all party bases, so feel free to start another thread about cheap political points that you feel the Conservative party/rightist political movement in Canada often scores at the expense of legitimate debate, if that's what you'd prefer to discuss. IMO I see the left-wing politicians of Canada consistently and successfully appealing to certain groups of voters through anti-Americanism (our Canadian identity is how we're NOT American!) and a false sense of caring for various minority groups (pandering to what they describe as disadvantaged groups). I see this as insidious and responsible for perpetuating bad trends in the Canadian culture. I'd like to talk about this phenomenon. Please spare me the hysteria of suggesting that I am some secret agent sent from Stephen Harper with a mission of collecting competitive political intelligence. In all honesty, this forum is largely devoid of that from what I've seen so far. I'm hoping I can engage in the occasional interesting discussion. I sure hope the two meaningless replies this thread has so far yielded isn't representative of the overall vibe of this forum.

Hi everyone, I'd like to discuss, from a broad perspective, common cheap tactics that the Liberal party often uses to its advantage. From another angle, we can discuss irrational prejudices/emotions that some Canadian demographics hold onto that that are exploited by the Liberals (and likely the NDP) in order to score these cheap points. Most recently, I remember an Ignatieff criticism of the Harper government as being "not just behind America, but behind Sarah Palin" (or something along those lines) with respect to the Federal government's spending on efforts to address climate change/global warming. I think it's pretty clear that Ignatieff is exploiting the anti-American sentiment that exists among many supporters of the Liberal party. Liberal supporters may say that I am extrapolating Ignatieff's intentions by connecting his criticism of Sarah Palin to the anti-American demographic, but I think many people see this cheap shot for what it is. I cannot recall specific examples of the top of my head, but I've definitely seen cheap points scored by the Liberal party when using anti-American sentiment. I've also seen cheap shots taken against "corporate greed" (to say nothing of government greed and waste) and capitalism/free markets. Disturbingly, I recall many statements by Liberal supporters (and its political representatives) trying to paint a picture of the Conservative party as racists/prejudiced/xenophobic white men with some ambiguous, but malicious and evil, secret agenda (remember the black and white anti-Harper ads during the last federal election?) Although I imagine that these cheap shots resonate most strongly among the liberal party base (probably unemployed folks, or low-achievers, and arts students), I worry that these cheap points also score points with many Canadians who don't identify themselves as Liberal party supporters. I'd like to hear from you folks about other general themes through which the Liberal party (and NDP, as well) can often depend on scoring cheap points with its base. From what I can tell, anti-American sentiment seems to be the most common trend for scoring cheap political points. I also think this sentiment is rooted in some strange belief among certain Canadians that the differences between the Canadian and American political cultures make us here in Canada superior to our southern neighbours. Before I forget, one thing that's just occurred to me is how this same Liberal base will often refer to historical Canadian military operations as "peacekeeping", as if that means Canadian soldiers aren't using weapons to do what must be done. I'll never understand how some of these folks think that the Canadian military shouldn't involve itself in "military" or "offensive" operations when doing work in violent/dangerous environments. It's as if they think one can easily separate military operations from peacekeeping operations in one clean slice, without acknowledging that they're just parsing words and playing semantics.

Where did you hear that $600 million was gone through the Harris/Eves years? Please provide some evidence. Otherwise, it's just a lie perpetuated by the Liberals in an attempt to deflect accountability.

I'm unsure why she wouldn't simply refer to her title: Governor General. Although this story is a non-issue an completely unimportant, I speculate that he intentionally refers to herself as the head of state in order to stroke her own ego... so that she may feel important. Enough of this, though... let's get back to government scandals and real politics.

Just as an aside, yesterday's CBC article regarding this scandal wasn't even on the Canadian news front page of cbc.ca. Clearly billion-dollar spending scandals within the Ontario Liberal government aren't top headlines. Today's article, found here, doesn't even make one mention of the Liberal party. Go ahead, press ctrl-f and do a search for "liberal", the word isn't mentioned in the entire article I just linked. Furthermore, when I attempted to a post a message illustrating the subtle pro-Liberal/anti-Conservative bias of the CBC, well... let's just say I'm still waiting for that comment to be approved by the moderators! It really drives me nuts that Canada's premier news agency is politicized. Ah well, c'est la vie!

Hi everyone, As Moonbox already stated, this thread is a train wreck as of the very first post. There are some interesting things to discuss, namely the Canadian government's decision to boycott Ahmedinejad's speech at the UN (a decision which I support), but it seems to me that this thread touches on several unrelated subjects and is certainly going to end up in disaster.