jacee Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 (edited) Harper’s crime bill is government by angry old uncle I've read this article by Brian Topp over and over because it really struck a chord with me, seems to capture a thought that's been in my head for quite a while, and some truths that aren't unique to this era but pervasive through all eras perhaps. The context of this article, of course, is the so-called 'Omnibus crime bill' now in the House of Commons. However, I think the 'angry old uncle' syndrome is relevant to many other issues as well, certainly any question of war or police action or social justice of any kind: There's always the 'angry old uncle' perspective ... 'life is tough ... punishment is good ... people are all out to get me/everyone else ... it's a dog-eat-dog world so be a big dog ... get over it' .. etc etc etc. This is rule by angry old uncle. A character in many families not without his charm and soft side, who shouts his angry views for the hundredth time demanding firm measures and an end to many abuses, even if the facts all p oint the other way. Unfortunately, the angry old uncles are now in charge of the government of Canada ... We can laugh off our particular family 'angry old uncle', and avoid him as much as possible, but in the larger context of our society ... how do we ensure balance when they are in charge or very influential in laws, wars, responses to protests, etc etc etc? Edited November 15, 2011 by jacee Quote
Argus Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 This is rule by angry old uncle. A character in many families not without his charm and soft side, who shouts his angry views for the hundredth time demanding firm measures and an end to many abuses, even if the facts all p oint the other way. Unfortunately, the angry old uncles are now in charge of the government of Canada ... If uncle believes in fundamental justice I'm all for him. It's unfortunate Brian Topp has no such interest, but then, one can't expect morality from a politician on the far left. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Hudson Jones Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 If uncle believes in fundamental justice I'm all for him. It's unfortunate Brian Topp has no such interest, but then, one can't expect morality from a politician on the far left. I don't think justice = heavier punishment for those who smoke marijuana than those who are pedophiles Justice also does not = a failing system that has already been admitted by several lawmakers (including republicans) who used what Harper wants to do in this bill. Don't be afraid of information and facts: Quote When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi
eyeball Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 Why aren't progressive conservatives speaking out about this and where are the fiscal conservatives? I don't really expect libertarians to give a rat's ass about this but just in case you're paying attention...what part of getting the state off people's back's don't you people understand? Am I to believe the social conservatives outnumber the progressives and fiscals and libertarians to the extent that they push and pull every string, button and lever in government? We're talking what, maybe 12.5% social conservatives in the federal electorate. How on Earth did we ever get to a point where the country is forced to dance to the tune of such a minority of crazy dinosaurs? Is this what you fine folks really voted for? I don't know about anyone else and I don't care what name it goes by but I want my country's natural governing ideology back. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
wyly Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 Why aren't progressive conservatives speaking out about this and where are the fiscal conservatives? I don't really expect libertarians to give a rat's ass about this but just in case you're paying attention...what part of getting the state off people's back's don't you people understand? Am I to believe the social conservatives outnumber the progressives and fiscals and libertarians to the extent that they push and pull every string, button and lever in government? We're talking what, maybe 12.5% social conservatives in the federal electorate. How on Earth did we ever get to a point where the country is forced to dance to the tune of such a minority of crazy dinosaurs? Is this what you fine folks really voted for? I don't know about anyone else and I don't care what name it goes by but I want my country's natural governing ideology back. that's what you get with our fucked up FPTP electoral system, oppression by the wacko minority... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Moonlight Graham Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 I usually call it "crusty old man syndrome". I listen to Bill O'Reilly or Lowell Green and it's just "rawr! rawr! rawr!" Isn't this just a code-word for "conservatives"?. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
jacee Posted November 15, 2011 Author Report Posted November 15, 2011 (edited) I usually call it "crusty old man syndrome". I listen to Bill O'Reilly or Lowell Green and it's just "rawr! rawr! rawr!" Isn't this just a code-word for "conservatives"?. I don't know ... maybe ... I know some grumpy old union workers/pensioners too ... But this crime bill bothers me a lot. I'm not in eyeball's 'natural governing ideology' corner either. The entrenchment of corporatism as virtual king has plagued administrations of both imo. Canada exists to facilitate the merchants of profit. Always has. Are they all grumpy punitive old men? I should get off the "men" kick, though it's most often true ... but ... These folks aren't simply grumpy old men.They are angry old men. Even Minister of Labour Lisa Raitt, when she muses about declaring the economy an essential service, sounds like an angry old man. The Prime Minister of Canada -- at the ripe old age of fifty-two -- is an angry old man. One gets the impression that he was an angry old man when he was in diapers. Edited November 15, 2011 by jacee Quote
grogy Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 that's what you get with our fucked up FPTP electoral system, oppression by the wacko minority... Yea, a lot of us have been oppressed by liberals for years because of that system. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 ....Is this what you fine folks really voted for? I don't know about anyone else and I don't care what name it goes by but I want my country's natural governing ideology back. So let me get this straight....you want the voters to have a choice and exercise their right to vote on matters of great import, except when they don't vote the way you like? Do I have that right? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GostHacked Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 So let me get this straight....you want the voters to have a choice and exercise their right to vote on matters of great import, except when they don't vote the way you like? Do I have that right? If the vote for war was left up to the people, most would say no. This much I would put money on. Only psychopaths want war. Our leaders do not represent us. Shady says the 99% don't represent him. Our leaders don't represent him either. Quote
Wild Bill Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 Why aren't progressive conservatives speaking out about this and where are the fiscal conservatives? I don't really expect libertarians to give a rat's ass about this but just in case you're paying attention...what part of getting the state off people's back's don't you people understand? Am I to believe the social conservatives outnumber the progressives and fiscals and libertarians to the extent that they push and pull every string, button and lever in government? We're talking what, maybe 12.5% social conservatives in the federal electorate. How on Earth did we ever get to a point where the country is forced to dance to the tune of such a minority of crazy dinosaurs? Is this what you fine folks really voted for? I don't know about anyone else and I don't care what name it goes by but I want my country's natural governing ideology back. Eyeball, we actually agree on much of what you said. I didn't vote conservative for this sort of crap either! However, you seem to forget something. You're against this crime approach. For a lot of it, so am I but what am I supposed to do when to me THE OTHER GUYS ALL SEEM WORSE! Just because I'm against this one factor am I supposed to chuck pretty well any and all other values I have and vote for the Liberals or the NDP? That's flat out absurd and I WON'T do it! Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Smallc Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 that's what you get with our fucked up FPTP electoral system, oppression by the wacko minority... Oh yes, the oppression in this country is disgusting. Oh, that was sarcasm by the way. We'd be much better off as the f'ed up basket case that most of continental Europe is right now. Quote
Wild Bill Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 The OP of this thread makes an interesting dichotomy! One side of the issue is not mentioned, however. It's true that as we get older we tend to get more impatient. That's because our experience often makes things more clear. We've seen them before! The fact that younger folks don't seem to get it and waste time diddling around with it can be frustrating. The unspoken converse is that it can take some years past adolescence for the human brain to develop enough to see and envision the consequences of actions. This has been very well documented and amongst other things, is much of the reason that crime is a young man's game. It's also why young men are most in demand as soldiers. They can lack the vision to understand they can die! This can make them more fearless warriors. As ordinary citizens go, young folks tend to support solutions that aren't always well-thought out as to their feasibility or unforeseen consequences. In a perfect society, there would be cooperation and teamwork to take advantage of both points of view. Today, we seem to see such arrogance on both sides that things tend to bumble along the longest and most inefficient path. Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
jacee Posted November 15, 2011 Author Report Posted November 15, 2011 Eyeball, we actually agree on much of what you said. I didn't vote conservative for this sort of crap either! However, you seem to forget something. You're against this crime approach. For a lot of it, so am I but what am I supposed to do when to me THE OTHER GUYS ALL SEEM WORSE! Just because I'm against this one factor am I supposed to chuck pretty well any and all other values I have and vote for the Liberals or the NDP? That's flat out absurd and I WON'T do it! Democracy isn't just voting every 4 years. You can speak up about each issue too, email Harper and your MP and let them know that you don't agree with this crime bill. [email protected]It's important that progressives who voted for Harper let him know that you don't agree with everything he proposes. They at least count the emails for/against. Sometimes I despair that people who care enough to discuss issues at length here, still think that all they can do about it is vote once and a while. That's not our only democratic responsibility: We can and should let them know how we think they're doing along the way too, especially when we think they're going off the rails. We're the ones who have to live with the results. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 We'd be much better off as the f'ed up basket case that most of continental Europe is right now. Interesting idea, Smallc - it seems that both Italy and Greece use proportional representation. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
wyly Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 (edited) Oh yes, the oppression in this country is disgusting. Oh, that was sarcasm by the way. We'd be much better off as the f'ed up basket case that most of continental Europe is right now. with that you disqualify yourself from adding anything relevant to the conversation as you don't even understand the difference between policy and democracy...it's no wonder some of your posts are so politically naive...and that's not sarcasm by the way... Edited November 15, 2011 by wyly Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
wyly Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 Interesting idea, Smallc - it seems that both Italy and Greece use proportional representation. how is it interesting? how is it even relevant to the OP? a minority (grumpy old conservatives) can hijack the greater population due to a flawed electoral process that denies the greater population it's political/social will?... a very small minority of hardliners have dictatorial control for the next four years and there's bugger all you, I or anyone else can do about it...if we are to have majority governments let it be through proportional representation not this f**ked up phoney democratic sham... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Shwa Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 Harper’s crime bill is government by angry old uncle I've read this article by Brian Topp over and over because it really struck a chord with me, seems to capture a thought that's been in my head for quite a while, and some truths that aren't unique to this era but pervasive through all eras perhaps. The context of this article, of course, is the so-called 'Omnibus crime bill' now in the House of Commons. However, I think the 'angry old uncle' syndrome is relevant to many other issues as well, certainly any question of war or police action or social justice of any kind: There's always the 'angry old uncle' perspective ... 'life is tough ... punishment is good ... people are all out to get me/everyone else ... it's a dog-eat-dog world so be a big dog ... get over it' .. etc etc etc. This is rule by angry old uncle. A character in many families not without his charm and soft side, who shouts his angry views for the hundredth time demanding firm measures and an end to many abuses, even if the facts all p oint the other way. Unfortunately, the angry old uncles are now in charge of the government of Canada ... We can laugh off our particular family 'angry old uncle', and avoid him as much as possible, but in the larger context of our society ... how do we ensure balance when they are in charge or very influential in laws, wars, responses to protests, etc etc etc? I have been using this theme to reply to some MLW posts for months now: Old Man Yells At Cloud Here is another one, a favourite: Quote
Michael Hardner Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 how is it interesting? how is it even relevant to the OP? a minority (grumpy old conservatives) can hijack the greater population due to a flawed electoral process that denies the greater population it's political/social will?... a very small minority of hardliners have dictatorial control for the next four years and there's bugger all you, I or anyone else can do about it...if we are to have majority governments let it be through proportional representation not this f**ked up phoney democratic sham... Well, the countries that have PR are possibly more willing to negotiate on tough decisions. I'm wondering if this may be instrumental in causing budget problems. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
dre Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 Its amazing that we would go in this direction. It has never worked for ANYONE and has been an abject failure everywhere its tried by every objective measure. Its the criminal justice equivalent to putting special labels on evolution text books... supported by the exact same type of people. Shamefull, and it makes us look very backward and stupid to the rest of the world. Even people in the US are wondering what the hell we are doing. Mandatory minimum sentencing has been a miserable failure down there, and is bankrupting states. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
wyly Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 Well, the countries that have PR are possibly more willing to negotiate on tough decisions. I'm wondering if this may be instrumental in causing budget problems. so a few countries using pr have issues with finances so automatically all eu countries with pr have the same problems?...that's about as irrational as me claiming that if several countries using FPTP are financial inept therefore they all must be inept...the issue here isn't competence, it's democracy...where a small portion(grumpy uncles) of a ruling party can hold power over the majority due to a electoral system that does not fairly represent the greater population... if efficiency of government were our only concern/goal we'd have a one party state, no negotiations at all... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Michael Hardner Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 so a few countries using pr have issues with finances so automatically all eu countries with pr have the same problems?...that's about as irrational as me claiming that if several countries using FPTP are financial inept therefore they all must be inept... I didn't say that... I'm just wondering... if you have anything to add on this, I'm interested to hear it. if efficiency of government were our only concern/goal we'd have a one party state, no negotiations at all... Because everybody knows one party states run the most efficient governments... Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
dre Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 I didn't say that... I'm just wondering... if you have anything to add on this, I'm interested to hear it. Because everybody knows one party states run the most efficient governments... ALL western countries have financial problems. Canada has fared better than most but only for the same reason Saudi Arabia has done ok. We have a shitload of natural resources to flog. This is probably the easiest country in the whole world to run. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Michael Hardner Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 ALL western countries have financial problems. Canada has fared better than most but only for the same reason Saudi Arabia has done ok. Maybe, too, because a majority Liberal government had the power to make large cuts without having to negotiate the tough decision and kick the problem down the road a few years ? Maybe ? Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
dre Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 (edited) Maybe, too, because a majority Liberal government had the power to make large cuts without having to negotiate the tough decision and kick the problem down the road a few years ? Maybe ? Its true, unchecked power is pretty efficient. A hereditary monarch could get stuff done REALLY easy. But like I said... the real reason why we are better off financially than those European countries is because we live on top of a massive pile of money. LIke I said... even backward islamic theocracies can make a pile of dough living on top of a huge cache of valuable natural resources. Take those out of the mix and we would be in big trouble pretty fast. Edited November 15, 2011 by dre Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.