Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ideology'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Canadian Political Discussions
    • Federal Politics
    • Provincial Politics
    • Local Politics
  • United States Political Discussions
    • US Federal Politics
    • US State Politics
  • International Political Discussions
    • Canada / United States Relations
    • The Rest of the World
  • Moral, Religious and Political Philosophy
    • Moral & Ethical Issues
    • Religion & Politics
    • Political Philosophy
    • Sex and Gender Issues
  • Off-Topic Discussions
    • Arts and Culture
    • Health, Science and Technology
    • Business and Economy
    • Travel, Leisure and Sports
    • Media and Broadcasting
  • News and Help
    • Support and Questions
    • News and Announcements
  • DataVis's Events
  • Sudo Intellectuals Club (by Michael Hardner)'s The Clubhouse
  • Sudo Intellectuals Club (by Michael Hardner)'s Suggest A Topic
  • Sudo Intellectuals Club (by Michael Hardner)'s Where is the World Headed ?
  • Sudo Intellectuals Club (by Michael Hardner)'s Media Hot and Cold
  • No Rules/Free Speech Club's General Talk
  • No Rules/Free Speech Club's Club Suggestions
  • No Rules/Free Speech Club's Canadian Politics
  • No Rules/Free Speech Club's US Politics
  • No Rules/Free Speech Club's World Politics
  • Jah Rules / Talk Is Cheap comedy club's No comment.
  • Democratic Dictatorships's Countries
  • Whatever I damn well want to talk about.'s Topics
  • Ice Hockey's NHL Hockey Talk
  • Anything Off Topic's Climate Cultists
  • Anything Off Topic's U.K. Europe and Illegal Migration
  • Anything Off Topic's Israel BDS Movement
  • Anything Off Topic's Trudeau and Senate
  • Anything Off Topic's Affirmative Action and Diversity
  • Anything Off Topic's A Tax on Home Equity is wrong
  • Anything Off Topic's Affirmative Action
  • History's General History
  • News of the Day's 2 more Catholic churches burned down in B.C.'s Interior
  • News of the Day's Topics

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







  1. www.centrism.ca I plan to continue conducting these types of interviews with members of this community if they're willing because I believe that once their ideas are openly discussed, it can lead to better understanding through interactions. If @BeaverFever does not want to answer, or for future interviews, as I had some history with some of you, not worry, will wait a few days and then move on to the next person, which will be the opposite in ideology. Will pick someone at random. Get ready to be tagged. 😎 The Interview with @Michael Hardner is here: https://repolitics.com/forums/topic/44986-interview-with-michael-hardner-from-repolitics/ The Interview with @Nationalist is here: https://repolitics.com/forums/topic/44988-interview-with-nationalist-from-repolitics/ Thank you to both for participating, some conversations are even ongoing in those 2 threads. Feel free to join in. --- Questions for @BeaverFever, given the limited attention span these days, including mine, I have condensed the questions into 3 sets for easier readability. Please don't hesitate to pose any general questions back to me at any time: 1. May you provide your perspective on the international influence of the MAGA movement and its relationship with progressive values? Do you believe there is an ongoing struggle between rigid traditionalism and progressive ideals on a global scale? If so, in your opinion, which side appears to be gaining momentum in this struggle? 2. Considering our differing political backgrounds, it is apparent that we have divergent views on certain matters. While we might agree that the Republican Party has deviated under Donald Trump's leadership, I perceive that you may not be open to considering figures like DeSantis as potential agents for restoring normalcy. Do you believe there is any possibility for individuals like DeSantis to help redirect the party, or do you see their influence as exacerbating right-wing populism in a different form from MAGA? 3. Addressing the complex topic of abortion, I am interested in your perspective on whether there is room for finding common ground between the pro-life and pro-choice movements. Given the visual representation of diverse supporters at both the pro-life and pro-choice marches, do you believe there is potential for compromise between these two sides, or is this issue inherently resistant to finding a middle ground? Merci.
  2. I ran across a random article, don't know who The Hub is, however, they state: "Canada needs an invigorated political middle", then say: Too bad our centrists are so boring. Poll: They also ask - Can a dynamic, relevant centrist movement emerge in a polarized Canada? I will use their data to make a thread about it. --- I acquired the domain www.centrism.ca as a result of a lighthearted conversation with @Michael Hardner on this forum after an evening of whiskey. However, as time has passed, I've noticed an increase in traffic to the domain, indicating a growing interest in this hobby. It has made me realize that if a serious political movement were to emerge in our country, as some people have started speculating, even if with irony, (see below 2 sources), it might be beneficial for this domain to be associated with prominent politicians in the future, therefore surrendering it. Perhaps even someone higher than @Moonbox, you are not political 100 % species either, my friend, sorry, which is a good thing 😎. This arrangement suits me because centrism is inherently political, but my intentions extend beyond traditional politics. My idea is more like a non-political megaphone, amplifying voices, and ideas that may otherwise go unheard. Easy work to be on the sidelines. I understand politics is harder than it looks, not that ignorant. There are certain things that remain elusive no matter how much attention you give them, and politics operates within a distinct realm. To claim participation in that world would be hypocritical, a sentiment that @Americana Antifa might even have a medical term for. Hence, if you are a serious politician or an organization seeking this domain, I invite you to come forward and present your ideas, even if 10 years from now. People can engage in debates, like in the democratic halls of Ancient Greece, we can make informed decisions. Such engagement could potentially increase the popularity of this platform, my "centrist" non-political platform which will have a new name and you can start here. https://thehub.ca/2023-06-05/ginny-roth-canada-needs-an-invigorated-political-centre-too-bad-our-centrists-are-so-boring/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-canada-has-room-for-a-new-centrist-party-provided-we-can-define-what/
  3. www.centrism.ca I plan to continue conducting these types of interviews with members of this community if they're willing because I believe that once their ideas are openly discussed, it can lead to better understanding through interactions. If @reason10 does not want to answer, or for future interviews, as I had some history with some of you, not worry, will wait a few days and then move on to the next person, which will be the opposite in ideology. Will pick someone at random. Get ready to be tagged. 😎 The Interview with @Michael Hardner is here: https://repolitics.com/forums/topic/44986-interview-with-michael-hardner-from-repolitics/ The Interview with @Nationalist is here: https://repolitics.com/forums/topic/44988-interview-with-nationalist-from-repolitics/ The Interview with @BeaverFever is here: https://repolitics.com/forums/topic/45003-interview-with-beaverfever-from-repolitics/ Thank you for participating, some conversations are even ongoing in those threads. Feel free to join in. --- Some Satire: What I am doing now with @reason10 is like Joe Rogan inviting Alex Jones then the <- left called him a fascist, however, I believe @reason10 is mostly playing an act and hope he answers these questions other ways than the threads upstairs, or he can do whatever he wants as this a radical libertarian space. Given the limited attention span these days, including mine, I have condensed the questions into 3 sets for easier readability. 1. I read your RX. I'm curious, was there a particular moment or realization that shaped your strong views or do you consider your views just being mainstream American? As someone with a teaching background who has witnessed changes in education since the Carter Administration, have you ever pondered whether evolving teaching methods and ideologies may have influenced your stance? Additionally, do you ever contemplate whether your resistance to negotiating with liberalism stems from the world changing too rapidly around you, so in a way maybe you have some fault too, or if it's because you believe that contemporary liberalism has veered off course, giving rise to excessive, some might call it extremist progressivism? 2. What are your thoughts on the international community of MAGA supporters? While I understand that you are a MAGA supporter, and I hold a different perspective, I believe that it shouldn't hinder us from engaging in meaningful conversation. The days of simply trolling one another are behind us, at least from my side. Interestingly, I have observed that members of the strong left from different countries share a bond and can relate to one another. In online forums, I have also noticed this connection. I'm curious to know if you perceive a similar sense of belonging among MAGA supporters from Canada, or if you view them as mere copycats. Furthermore, do you believe that the MAGA movement requires an international presence to counteract progressivism? As you witness the opposition movement in your own country, do you think it should remain solely American or could it benefit from international support? 3. Given the legal challenges that Trump is currently facing, there are rumors circulating about other serious charges against him. Stepping away from the realm of being a sports fan, I'd like to pose a question to you. In the scenario where MAGA is unable to continue with the Republican party, considering the presence of your Florida governor, DeSantis, if Trump were to run as a third-party candidate, whom would you support? Would your allegiance lean towards DeSantis or Trump? Moreover, considering the various issues surrounding Biden, could a three-ticket race open up new possibilities? Specifically, Biden vs. DeSantis vs. Trump, each accompanied by a female Vice Presidential candidate such as Kamala Harris, Nikki Haley, or Candace Owens. I've shared my prediction, but I'm curious to hear your thoughts on it as well as your own predictions. Thank you for your time.
  4. www.centrism.ca @Michael Hardner, let's set aside the pleasantries because this isn't the Jimmy Kimmel show and I'm not profiting from this, not yet, maybe if I get some rating later on. So, let's get straight to the point. Before then, however, I will say this: I plan to continue conducting these types of interviews with members of this community if they're willing because I believe that once their ideas are openly discussed, it can lead to better understanding through interactions. I consider myself qualified to be the interviewer since I've managed to offend everyone on this board, leaving me without any biases or alliances. It would be my pleasure to interview those who are willing, with no personal motives, just a focus on broader topics. The next interview will be with @Nationalist, if he agrees, as he holds opposing views to yours on certain matters. --- Michael, here are the 10 questions (well, there are more than 10, 10 series): 1. As you know, this blog has to keep up with the rating game to survive in the long run, so I can't avoid the first question: Biden or Trump? Or do you see a third surprise? How did America reach a point where men like Trump or Biden, at their age, are still running for office, and is that worrisome for the world in which Russia and China are showing their authoritarian claws? 2. In today's political climate, we often see a deep divide between conservatism and socialism. As someone who identifies as both conservative and socialist (I am sorry if I got this wrong, my assumption), how do you reconcile these seemingly contradictory ideologies? Could you explain your perspective on this and how it influences your approach to policy and governance? 3. In your intellectual pursuits, it seems that there is a lack of acknowledgment or understanding of reactionary politics and the concerns of social conservatives, particularly in relation to issues such as LGBTQ activism. Some argue that this ignorance or dismissal hinders the possibility of finding common ground and compromise. How do you respond to these criticisms, and do you believe there is room for dialogue and understanding between progressive movements and those who hold more traditionalist or reactionary viewpoints? 4. Building upon our previous discussion, considering the fast-changing landscape of our world, do you believe it is important to actively engage with traditionalists and even reactionary individuals in order to prevent alienation and bridge the gap between differing ideologies? How can we foster dialogue and understanding in a society that is evolving rapidly, while still respecting the concerns and values of those who may be more resistant to change? 5. Considering the rapid advancements in AI and technology, many speculate that these changes will have a profound impact on the shape of our world. In light of these transformations, do you believe that governments will need to implement Universal Basic Income (UBI) policies to ensure economic stability and address potential job displacement? Additionally, you've mentioned a targeted UBI approach for specific people in Canada. Could you elaborate on your ideas regarding the implementation of UBI and how it could be tailored to address specific needs? 6. Climate change has become a pressing global issue, with strong arguments advocating for immediate and drastic action to mitigate its effects. However, this topic often sparks polarizing debates, with some individuals denying the existence or significance of human-induced climate change. In your opinion, is there a middle ground that acknowledges the concerns of folks that deny climate change while still addressing the urgent need for environmental sustainability? How can we foster constructive dialogue and find common solutions that accommodate varying perspectives on this critical issue? 7. Shifting our focus to Canadian politics, Pierre Poilievre has been characterized by some as a populist figure. In your opinion, do you believe Poilievre's style and approach align with the Canadian political landscape, or do you see it as too populistic for the country? Additionally, what factors do you think contributed to the rejection of Erin O'Toole's leadership bid? Lastly, despite the controversies and scandals surrounding him, do you think Justin Trudeau still has a viable chance of winning another term as Prime Minister? 8. Regarding recent events involving leaks from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and their subsequent coverage in The Globe and Mail, there has been speculation about the motives behind these leaks and the role of legitimate patriotic forces within the security intelligence community. What is your perspective on this matter? Do you believe there are genuine efforts to awaken the country, or do you see it primarily as a game driven by specific interests? Additionally, considering the role of The Globe and Mail as a platform for these leaks, what is your opinion on their involvement in amplifying the CSIS's message? Lastly, in this complex situation, where do you standβ€”with the CSIS or with the Liberal government? 9. As we observe the growing divisions and polarization in the United States, do you find yourself grateful for the Canadian system? In what ways do you believe our Canadian system fosters a sense of unity and mitigates the level of division we see in other countries? 10. Lastly, I would like to know your opinion regarding the proposed idea for centrism.ca, which involves using technology to film troublemakers from both the right -> and the <- left on the streets of Ontario for ratings. The intention behind this idea is to provide a balancing force in society. The money can be used in different ways towards this new ideology, not looking to get rich, not a communist either though. Do you personally find this idea ethically acceptable? How do you perceive the potential ethical challenges, and what steps would you take to ensure fairness in the portrayal of individuals on the blog? Thank you for your time, Michael.
  5. www.centrism.ca I plan to continue conducting these types of interviews with members of this community if they're willing because I believe that once their ideas are openly discussed, it can lead to better understanding through interactions. If @Nationalist does not want to answer, not to worry, will wait a few days and then move on to the next person, which will be the opposite in ideology, was thinking @BeaverFever. Everyone will get a turn if you want to step up in the Arena. The Interview with @Michael Hardner is here: https://repolitics.com/forums/topic/44986-interview-with-michael-hardner-from-repolitics/ --- 10 Series Questions for @Nationalist: 1. How do you navigate the delicate balance between safeguarding national interests and fostering international cooperation in today's global political landscape? 2. What strategies do you advocate for striking a balance between nurturing domestic economies and engaging in global trade and exchange, ensuring economic growth while maintaining a distinct national identity? 3. In a globalized world, how do you view the importance of cultural preservation? What steps do you believe should be taken to maintain cultural uniqueness while respecting diverse perspectives? 4. As an advocate of nationalistic principles, how do you approach accessing information and news sources in the era of digital interconnectedness? Do you find Western media channels to be too socially liberal, leading you to seek out alternative foreign sources that align more closely with your right-wing stance? 5. How do you propose reconciling nationalistic tendencies with the need for international cooperation in addressing global challenges like climate change? What is your perspective on climate change itself? 6. What is your view of the Monarchy? 7. What is your view on the role of supranational organizations and treaties, such as the United Nations, regional alliances, or transatlantic military alliances like NATO, in upholding national interests while tackling global challenges? 8. In the context of ongoing culture wars and the perceived divide between the elite and everyday citizens, how do you navigate the dismissal or devaluation of your perspectives and experiences? Has this led you to seek out alternative sources of information and media that align more closely with your beliefs, even if you have doubts about their validity? How does this cultural divide influence your worldview? Do you find you have less patience for "the other side"? 9. There is often criticism in Canadian politics that politicians are too mainstream and fail to bring about significant change, particularly from individuals with nationalist inclinations like yourself. What is your perspective on this matter? Are there any politicians in Canada today whom you admire and trust to represent your views? Are you willing to compromise? 10. Lastly, I would like to know your opinion regarding the proposed idea for centrism.ca, which involves using technology to film troublemakers from both the right -> and the <- left on the streets of Ontario for ratings. The intention behind this idea is to provide a balancing force in society. The money can be used in different ways towards this new ideology, not looking to get rich, not a communist either though. Do you personally find this idea ethically acceptable? How do you perceive the potential ethical challenges, and what steps would you take to ensure fairness in the portrayal of individuals on the blog? Thank you for your time.
  6. Welcome to the poll where we delve into the realm of Joe Rogan's politics! In an era where political discourse is often divided, finding balanced voices can be a challenge. Some turn to left-leaning sources like <- Secular Talk with Kyle K or the <- <- TYT brigade @Americana Antifa while others seek right-leaning perspectives from figures like the retired and outspoken Michael Savage ->-> (whom I was a former customer of in my younger irrational years) or the somewhat reasonable Ben Shapiro. -> Maybe you have some reasonable choices to add to the list. However, many have found their way to Joe Rogan's YouTube videos, just like me in the past years, as ideology has evolved in terms of American Politics and occasionally these days, listening in the background. Lately, I have observed his cautious approach, skillfully blending discussions on sports while consciously steering clear of controversial topics. Although he occasionally touches on the cultural war, I believe he is a very astute individual who recognizes the depths of the current political climate and the potential consequences of missteps. Maybe I might be wrong, I watch 1-2 videos a week. Poll: Supportive: I support Joe Rogan's political views and find them insightful and well-reasoned. Neutral: I don't have a strong opinion or haven't closely followed Joe Rogan's political stances. Critical: I disagree with Joe Rogan's politics and have concerns about some of his viewpoints or statements.
  7. A recent article from the libertarians at reason.com highlights the public's negative outlook on the next presidential election, with majorities considering both Joe Biden and Donald Trump as potential setbacks or disasters for the country. Poll: Are voters to blame for the current state of politics in the United States? Yes, voters have contributed to the current state of politics. No, voters are not to blame for the state of politics. It's a complex issue with multiple factors at play.
  8. Left Wing <--- CNN drops Don Lemon as U.S. cable news sees major shakeup. <--> Another shocker, after Tucker Carlson's departure from the Right Wing ---> Fox News: https://repolitics.com/forums/topic/44274-tucker-carlson-out-at-fox-news/
  9. One of my average Joe's banners has been tampered with. The image of Margaret Chase Smith, a respected US Republican figure, was removed. The second part, logo was covered with a perplexing message: "Defund NCFST." This message aims to highlight the connection between child welfare and the legacy of residential schools, as recognized by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. (SEE PICTURE BELOW). What's worth noting is that this message further suggests that Native Child and Family Services of Toronto (NCFST), a mandated children's aid agency, receives extensive funding and is predominantly led by individuals identified as "white." To the person responsible for this act, if you're reading this forum, I invite you to engage in a fair analysis of the issues surrounding child welfare and leadership. Register, wait for 5 posts, and share your grievances, however, let's refrain from making sweeping generalizations. The space on the banner could have been used for constructive discussion instead. Lots of space on the sides. Blaming entire groups in society, as you blamed "white people" here, oversimplifies the matter, is reactionary, superficial, and counterproductive. As a matter of fact, I know my history, you would have wanted someone like Margaret Chase Smith during McCarthy's time to help you. Perhaps I am not adequately informed about this agency and the challenges it faces. That's precisely why I intended to initiate a conversation. I am sure other people more know than I do. Do you agree with this message? Why and why not?
  10. While the goal, is important to approach discussions with fairness and respect, it is undeniable that certain labels are frequently employed on these forums or in the real world. First to admit again, not a saint, have used them, the ones according to one's BIAS. Poll: What is the perceived strength of political labels in shaping public opinion? Significant influence Some influence Minimal influence This is what I came up with: <-- used by the left when the debate gets heated: Fascists Racists Bigots Capitalist pigs Climate deniers --> used by the right when the debate gets heated: Socialists Snowflakes Communists Globalists MSM (=) used by the center when the debate gets heated: Extremist ideologues/Dogmatics Tribalistic partisans Populists Echo chambers followers Propaganda peddlers My Opinion: Labels in the social media world have a powerful impact on people, particularly politicians. Many blindly follow their leaders without thinking, leading to shouting matches via labels, on a daily basis, instead of meaningful discussions. In a world with a short attention span, a label can impact political discourse. In my view, is best to observe this phenomenon in the DeSantis vs Trump shout matches in the next couple of months. 😎
  11. From the libertarians reason.com titled "The Post-Liberal Authoritarians Want You To Forget That Private Companies Have Rights." The article critiques the notion that there is no meaningful distinction between the public and private sectors in the United States. It emphasizes the importance of constitutional protections and raises concerns about using government power to suppress private entities based on ideological differences. Poll: Are the public and private sectors clearly distinct or closely intertwined in the US? 1. Clear Distinction 2. Closely intertwined
  12. I specialize in opening up controversial discussions. I was thinking about discussing Danielle Smith of Alberta, but I want to make it clear that questionable language is used by politicians from all sides, all the way to the Federal Level, AND not just conservatives, + this was in private. Some use "communists", not "nazis". I use both. πŸ˜„ Trudeau's public display of anger during the convoy protests makes me wonder what he may have said in private. Oh, I have some theories about that, when he stood around announcing the Emergency Act, before then, my theory is that he said a lot in private about the convoy group, which I don't agree with by the way, just looking at the politician's hypocrisy. SERIOUS NOTE - Danielle Smith recently apologized for comments linking COVID vaccinations to Nazi followers, which doesn't surprise me due to the prevalence of such tactics even here on the board, on a daily basis. If people are so angry over Covid-19, a self-defense mechanism kicks in, and the word "nazi" "communist" "deep state" "conspiracy" "sheep" come out. I think it's important to be open-minded and start a poll to gauge whether people find it appropriate to use the word "Nazi" when discussing COVID-19? Options: 1. Yes, it's appropriate 2. No, is not appropriate 3. Other opinion
  13. Democrats, Republicans & Monopoly. A production by reason.com, a leading Libertarian publication: Austin Bragg Andrew Heaton John Carter Meredith Bragg πŸ˜„
  14. First, let me start by giving my opinion, that I do not like superficial slogans which involve no thinking, but this debate is more than a slogan. From the Libertarians, reason.com: Last year, a Michigan middle school forced two students to remove their "Let's Go Brandon" sweatshirts because they violated a dress code rule prohibiting clothing with "profane" slogans. The students have now filed a lawsuit against their school with the support of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a First Amendment nonprofit. Poll: Should schools be ALLOWED TO FORCE students to remove clothing with potentially controversial slogans? Options: 1. Yes 2. No 3. It depends on the situation 4. Other
  15. It seems like someone forgot to start a thread on "Enlightened Centrism" and is currently preoccupied with arguing about what they consider to be "important" issues. They are missing out on the opportunity to engage in challenging and possibly outside the box debates. If @Americana Antifa will join this thread, may I ask you, to focus on ideas and not swear when you can't hold. If you can't show respect to your keyboard, is very possible you will miss the opportunity to exchange ideas. I used a grammar software to write the below, for better communication, will start this thread with something original which you got me thinking about, then we can debate the real stuff if you respond: Upgraded my computer from a 386 processor to a 486 and finally to a Pentium in the 1990s. I was thrilled to discover the potential of my computer upgrades and eagerly explored new possibilities. Once I had completed the essential setup for the things that mattered, I found myself getting restless and sought out a strategy game to take breaks from my routine. It was exactly how I use this forum like. Started playing a 1998 game called Dune 2000, a strategy game with three factions: House Atreides, House Harkonnen, and House Ordos. Atreides and Harkonnen were popular picks, known for their dogmatic principles. Just like in politics, these 2 sides constantly were battling for control and assuming they had the answer for everything. Atreides and Harkonnen were the good and the bad. Depending on your ideology of course you will take credit for the good one, but the other side thinks opposite of you, is my estimation. Go ahead and call me a Nihilist. πŸ˜„ Found myself drawn to the third faction, Ordos, a group of independent mercenaries not aligned with Atreides or Harkonnen. Constantly preferred Ordos, even when others played Atreides or Harkonnen. The more people screamed about the other 2, I went with the Middle Ordos. Did not have an interest that much in politics at the time, my focus was somewhere else, was listening to some agitators from the right, is true, as I told you my Libertarian right BIAS. Was participating in trips at various irrational football activities 😎 which could turn mob related. Did not really cross that red line but probably did my part for ideology more than most keyboard warriors. I was very interested in ideas that emphasized individual freedom and pragmatism over rigid dogma or ideology and Ordos' focus on strict productivity and independence was appealing. This is something that I keep coming back these days: Pragmatism & Productivity, and rejecting dogmatism. Your rant reminded me of this game and how it relates today. Were they perfect, the radical centrists Ordos? absolutely not! They were quite ruthless at times and showed no backing down to achieve their interests, but at the same time they wanted for the main houses to stand so they can move along too and allow their skills to get maximum results. Just like the idea of centrism that I have, with a BIAS from the right. As long as people like you and your "friends" from the other side tell me that I am not, it means I am doing quite fine. Looking forward to hear your points about how "Enlightened Centrism" is damaging to you and your echo-chamber. Thanks. Will take my time to respond, lots of things on the go. If others want to come in and share their ideas on: "Enlightened Centrism", please go ahead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dune_2000
  16. ⬆️ Trending Democratic-backed Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Janet Protasiewicz has won a crucial seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, defeating Republican-backed former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Dan Kelly. The Associated Press called the race. The elections in Wisconsin were supposed to be non-partisan, however seeing this campaign, just speaks volumes to the ideological battle amongst Judges too.
  17. Once, I was approached by an activist who was speaking with a loud voice, does not matter their political leaning. <- or ->. Their mistake was when they said "You will need to do this". I try listening to all perspectives, but I draw the line when someone claims to have all the answers or tells me the direction to take, then the radical comes out. πŸ˜„ So, I stopped the activist and asked them a simple question, 'Do you know physics? Do you know who Newton was?' I reminded them that Newton once thought he had the truth, only to be proven wrong by Einstein, that his theories only work in limited cases, and now Einstein's theories are being challenged by new discoveries. I assumed the body language with eyes straight at them (remember: body language is the number 1 communication tool), words is after and proceeded to communicate: "If even the laws of physics can be uncertain, who are you to claim absolute truth in matters of politics or society?" That moment of silence was enough for the activist to freeze and managed to make my way forward. (=) What do you use to get out from a conversation with a dogmatic?
  18. Game (US, CA & Rest): List the name and 3 qualities of someone that you do NOT like politically! @Perspektiv with @Zeitgeist are delivering today. I got this idea reading their exchanges. Soon, you will have to charge me a fee, @Perspektiv, second thread from you. I will start with Trump, which is one politician that I do not like, the most. He should have stayed in business, he does not belong in politics, is my opinion. 3 Qualities of MAGA cult leader, sorry, movement πŸ˜„ Business acumen -> Trump is a successful businessman who has built a brand empire that includes real estate, hotels, golf courses, and other ventures. I could find flaws here, however, he did survive, and his brand is successful. Criminal justice reform -> During his presidency, Trump signed the First Step Act, which aimed to reform the criminal justice system by reducing mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offences. Strong economy -> Trump had a strong economy during his presidency, with low unemployment rates and a booming stock market.
  19. This is what I found from the below article (via Reason.com - a leading libertarian source): Social Security and Medicare are facing insolvency within the next decade and require urgent reforms, but both Republicans and Democrats have been avoiding responsibility for the issue. Past bipartisan reforms have been successful, and future reforms will require politicians from both sides of the aisle to come together. Can they?! In addition to solvency, these programs are also unfair to certain groups and can discourage work among seniors while burdening younger workers. --- Partial Article: Republicans' and Democrats' Refusal To Reform Social Security and Medicare Is Political Malpractice In 10 years, the programs' funds will be insolvent. Over the next 30 years, they will run a $116 trillion shortfall. Republicans and Democrats have been tripping over each other to tell voters how committed they are to making zero changes to Social Security and Medicare. Meanwhile, the Social Security and Medicare Trustees just confirmed yet again that within 10 years the programs' funds will be insolvent. Full Article - Click Here
  20. The thing about attacking political allies for their lack of purity is that sometimes they take it to heart. Tricia Cotham was elected as a Democrat to her second stint in the North Carolina Legislature last year. She just joined the Republican caucus. The move is cementing Republicans' toe-hold in a fast-changing swing state, handing them a veto-proof majority in the middle of the legislative session and a clear runway to enact their agenda despite opposition from Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper. The result is a GOP super majority that will be a headache for Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper. https://www.wsj.com/articles/north-carolina-tricia-cotham-democrat-republican-roy-cooper-school-choice-15eeb32c
  21. I promised @Dougie93 we will do this thread. It comes to a point when you are at war with someone, one needs to understand their view. This is my BIAS, I welcome @Dougie93 and any members to fight me on what I have, I am willing to change my mind: The Orange Order is a fraternal organization with roots in Northern Ireland that promotes Protestantism and British identity. The organization has a long history of sectarianism and has been accused of discrimination against Catholics and other minority groups. In Canada, the Orange Order has been involved in numerous controversies, including clashes with Catholic communities and opposition to bilingualism and multiculturalism. While the Orange Order claims to support the principles of democracy and freedom, their actions have often contradicted these values. It is possible to acknowledge the historical significance of the Orange Order while also acknowledging their problematic actions and beliefs. As a radical centrist, it is important to listen to diverse perspectives and seek to understand the complex issues surrounding the Orange Order. While the organization may have some positive aspects, such as promoting community engagement and charity work, it is important to recognize their problematic history and beliefs. Blindly supporting the Orange Order or any organization without critically examining their actions and beliefs is not a productive approach. Ultimately, as Canadians (new or old), we should strive to promote inclusion, respect for diversity, and a commitment to democratic values. Engaging in constructive dialogue and finding common ground is key to addressing controversial issues like the Orange Order in a productive and respectful manner.
  22. Poll (CA & US): What is political polarisation driven by in Canada and America, everywhere really? Multiple Options Poll: Ideology Media Tribalism Economic Factors Historical Legacies Other
  23. There was a time in my life when I was not happy with the income that I was making, and would take any extra jobs that came my way. So when someone recommended I fix a man's Windows XP computer in the early 2000s, I jumped at the opportunity. Little did I know that this would be one of the most insane experiences of my life. When I arrived at his home, I noticed an iron cross in his room, like the old ones from Adolph time's. But being from a similar Eastern European community, I thought it might just be a coincidence, maybe he does not even know what it is, he just thinks is a cross. However, as we started talking, I realized that this man was a political nut. He began to speak about the legionnaire movement, which was a fascist militia, and even brought out a copy of Mein Kampf from his library. I was shocked and couldn't believe what I was seeing. I couldn't take such a book in public, especially in Canada. But I had to keep my cool, so I refused politely and tried to change the subject. However, he persisted and started talking about his theories on race, claiming that the Asian community was smarter now. I couldn't take it anymore and told him that I had read the book already, so in a way, yes, his theories fall apart because now the Asian community rules. πŸ˜„ That was an ignorant statement by myself too, but just wanted to stick to him where it hurts him. Anyhow, I managed to change the subject eventually and he was happy with his computer. God knows what he did on it after. That's the battle with every fanatic, changing the subject. Years later, the same man called me up to do some maintenance work. Now, some time passed, I thought to myself, he is just an old fool talking nonsense. As we were conversating, he mentioned that he had gone to school in Moscow. I couldn't resist and asked him how he could have been both a legionnaire fascist and a communist? To my surprise, he responded with the same cold and calculating tone, "It is not about fascism and communism, you go where the power is!" Looking back on that experience, I can't help but feel disgusted by the twisted mindset of fascists and communists. They may have different ideologies, but their ultimate goal is always the same - power and control. And it's always the innocent people who suffer the consequences at the hands of twisted men like this. Now, he could have talked nonsense just to impress the computer guy as his old wife was beside him the first time, but I don't think so, and I thought very long and hard to look him up and find out his history, whose lives he destroyed by reporting, and in which cities but that would have made me like him. Ultimately, Karma and Old Age probably got him. I moved cities since then, so I did not have the chance to interact again. Maybe for the better, exposure to such minds only brings trouble and disease. Not sure how he weaseled his way into this country. Take this story as you please, satire or not. 😎
  24. Do you meet local (**your area) politicians prior to voting or go by Party Doctrine? or is it complicated, depending on the circumstances? **for provincial and federal ridings.
  25. ---> FInally, a libertarian article that is trending. The well-known left and right media companies had monopolies after the State of the Union. Time to give someone else a platform too. The writing at reason.com, they like to blend a little bit of irony into their writing which serves well. Now, I am sure @robosmith will get going at finding holes, πŸ˜„ in my defense, before the California committee wakes up that I am not familiar with the specific cases in the below article, however, this trend needs to be talked/ranted about. Time and Time, I see articles trending about people not being allowed to speak. Helllllo? Wake up? This is not people like "Ye" or "Nick Fuentes". ---> It does not matter if it's a Religious or a Progressive Ideological echo-chamber. The mob thinking needs to be tackled in my opinion. --- When my son, Anthony, began looking at colleges, the environment they offer for free-wheeling debate was an important consideration. Respect for freedom of speech and thought at colleges has been on the ropes for a while and worsened over the past year. Some schools, like the ones to which my son applied, rank well when it comes to tolerance for diversity of ideas, but others are the absolute pits. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a civil liberties group that began with a focus on academia, just published a rogues' gallery of institutions of higher education that anybody with an independent mind should avoid. "Each year, FIRE bestows a special dishonor upon a select group of American colleges that go above and beyond in their efforts to trample expressive freedom. These are the schools that stopped at nothing to crush faculty rights, destroy student expression, and leave guest speakers in the dust," the group announced on February 2. "For that, we owe them their just reward: A spot on our exclusive '10 Worst Colleges for Free Speech' list." The dishonored schools are: Hamline University (MN), The Pennsylvania State University*, Collin College (TX), Texas A&M, University of Pennsylvania, Emerson College (MA), Emporia State University (KS), Tennessee Tech, University of Oregon, and Loyola University (IL). Additionally, Georgetown University (DC) won a Lifetime Censorship Award for taking "122 days to determine that a 45-word tweet is protected political speech." That involved law professor Ilya Shapiro who ultimately resigned despite prevailing through the ordeal over comments about the Supreme Court selection process. He worried that the school "set me up for discipline the next time I transgress progressive orthodoxy." After the university's multiple appearances on the "10 Worst" list for transgressions ranging from the Shapiro incident to preventing students from campaigning for Bernie Sanders, FIRE bestowed the lifetime award to acknowledge "Georgetown's fondness for censorship." In this dubious achievement, it joins Yale University, DePaul University, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and Syracuse University. The other schools on this year's "10 Worst" list may not fall into the same repeat-offender category, but they've certainly been creative in earning their booby prizes. Minnesota's Hamline won its spot by dismissing an adjunct art professor who "showed a 14th century painting depicting Islam's prophet Muhammadβ€”but not before she offered multiple warnings, acknowledged that some Muslims believe the prophet should not be depicted in any way, and told students they weren't required to look," in FIRE's words. The ensuing controversy over speech and academic freedom continues, with the faculty last month asking President Fayneese Miller to resign. Collin College, a Texas community college and therefore bound by the First Amendment, earned its distinction for a series of retaliations against faculty who upset the administration. Its most recent move was to fire "history professor Michael Phillips for advocating for the removal of Confederate statues and criticizing the college's COVID-19 policies," as FIRE puts it. Phillips is suing Collin. The University of Oregon gained its ranking by directing faculty search committees to impose diversity, equity, and inclusion assessments of candidates that go well beyond the stated goal of creating a welcoming environment and instead serve as ideological litmus tests. "Basically, if you want to work at UO, you have to pledge allegiance to and promote administrators' DEI [Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion] vision," notes FIRE. "These requirements violate faculty's freedom of expression and academic freedom." DEI statements have proliferated throughout academia and are now included in consideration for tenure at 21.5 percent of colleges and universities, and at 45.6 percent of large institutions of higher education, according to a 2022 survey by the American Association of University Professors. Some are less ideological than others, but there's a tendency for them to increasingly demand adherence to specific points of view. "Every psychologist who wants to present at the most important convention in our field must now say how their work advances anti-racism," NYU Professor Jonathan Haidt objected last year to an "explicitly ideological" DEI requirement from the Society for Personality and Social Psychology. He announced his resignation from the professional organization rather than comply. DEI statements entered my son's academic considerations as well, though tangentially. After he'd already decided to attend the University of Arizona, the state's Goldwater Institute reported that "Arizona's three public universities have all begun forcing faculty job applicants to provide mandatory 'diversity statements' as a condition of hiring." So far, 28 percent of job postings at the University of Arizona require DEI statements, far less than the 73 percent of postings at Northern Arizona University or the 81 percent at Arizona State University. The University of Arizona scores well overall in terms of respect for free speech, ranked as it is in 18th place (above average) on FIRE's latest College Free Speech rankings. That's good news for my kid, but the news isn't so encouraging overall for anybody pursuing higher education. That assessment found an increase in the number of schools hitting rock-bottom "red light" status relative to those enjoying "green light" ratings when it comes to tolerance for ideas and expression. "Two universities joined the ranks of green light schools this year: the University of North Carolina at Asheville and the University of South Florida. While none of the green light schools lost their status, 12 schools dropped from a yellow to a red light rating, and the percentage of red light schools rose by 0.8 percent, the first increase in 15 years," according to FIRE. That kind of slippage in maintaining an open and respectful environment for speech and thought is why it's so important to call out schools that, for whatever reason, punish people who express themselves and debate ideas. Without consequences, it's too easy for them to target dissidents, activists, agitators, and heterodox thinkers. Ultimately, you end up with echo chambers instead of institutions of learning. By all appearances, my son is off to a good start in higher education with his plans to attend a school that meets his educational needs while also encouraging open discussion. Everybody preparing college applications would be well-served to similarly consider the environment for free speech when they contemplate their continuing education, and to cross off all of those listed among the "10 Worst Colleges for Free Speech." https://reason.com/2023/02/10/free-speech-group-calls-out-10-censorship-prone-colleges-to-avoid/
  • Create New...