The Decline

[Argus]

So I was reading a review of Denis Arcand's film The Decline of the American Empire - which has nothing to do with the US, btw. It's actually about Quebec. One part of the review struck a chord and seemed worth discussion.

"While the exact circumstances of societal breakdown might differ somewhat according to location, at the core of what’s killing our communities, in Mr. Arcand’s telling, is the cult of the individual and the death of collective values. We live for nothing and no one but ourselves and the fleeting pleasures and possessions we spend our time pursuing."

This echoed themes I've read and heard from others of late. With the fall of religion, and the falling out of fashion of patriotism, with families reduced to perhaps two to three individuals instead of the huge, multi-generational mob that was the norm even back fifty years ago (I had eighteen uncles and aunts when I was a child, and they all had multiple kids) there doesn't seem to be any sense of belonging to something, of striving for something, of unity. Nothing binds us together as a community or as people. We're increasingly alone in our world, with nothing to care about but ourselves.  And what do our community leaders do about it? Make it worse, usually. Trump divides America. Trudeau insists that Canada is a 'post nation state' with no unifying theme, culture or values other than tolerance of different people. Both of them disdain religion and religious values. Over in Europe, I don't see anything better. in the UK, May is an idiot, and the opposition leader is a lunatic of the far left. In France, the opposition leader is on the far right while the PM fumbles. Russia and China are led by brutal dictators. 

So if there is no white knight on he horizon how do we save ourselves?

Edited July 8, 2018 by Argus

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

So if there is no white knight on he horizon how do we save ourselves?

We don't.

Embrace the horror.

[bush_cheney2004]

Haven't you been paying attention ?   "White Knights" are part of the problem.

[Queenmandy85]

I just don't see the break down. My love of this country is pretty strong, not just for what I have received from it, but because it is a great place to live. My family began coming to British North America about four centuries ago. The ancestors of my training Officer at the U of S  have lived here for thousands of years and he too, is happy to be a Canadian. At the Canada Day celebrations, there were lots of new Canadians who obviously love living here. 

In Saskatoon, we celebrate Folk Fest in August. Various ethic organizations create Pavillions to show off their cultures. There are Croation, Jewish, French, Metis, First Nations, Fillipino, Chinese, Ukranian (sometimes two Ukranian pavillions) German, Dutch, Norwegian, Greek, African, Irish, and Scottish...those are just the ones I can name off the top of my head. City Transit has special buses that go from Pavillion to Pavillion and your fare is your Folkfest passport. It is a great "international" party except that it is Canadian and a celebration of our blended culture. Wonderful food, music and exhibits. It is a powerful demonstration of unity and fellowship.

Canada is a wonderful country because we benifit from ideas and cultures from all over the world. Do I believe we are over populated? Yes.  Do I believe our Sovereign Queen Elizabeth is anointed by God? In my gut, yes. Am I right? Even I know the answer on that one. You mention the White Knight. WE are the white knights. We are the authors of our own fortune. Not President Trump, not Justin Trudeau or even the Queen. We are a community that pulls together. 

Edited July 8, 2018 by Queenmandy85

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I just don't see the break down. 

We are dying out, as a people. You don't think that's symptomatic of anything?

You talk about all those immigrants. Why do we need immigrants? Because we're dying out? We're not breeding? People aren't bothering to have children. What is the end result of that, not just here but throughout the West? Come on, you know what it is.

So we bring in immigrants, people from non-Western cultures, mostly, with non Western values. More and more each year, until we can't assimilate them. What is the end result of that? Come on, you know what it is.

 

[Queenmandy85]

Yes, my training officer explained it to me. He said his forefathers had too lax an immigration policy back in the 1490's. The result is, in the Canadian Forces (at that time) there was only one First Nations member for every thousand members. That meant that each Indian was responsible for looking after a thousand white guys. He pointed out how lucky we were. He only had to look after 30 of us.

We are hardly disappearing. The population of Canada hes tripled since I was born. The problem is numbers. We cannot maintain our wilderness character with so many people. 

43 minutes ago, Argus said:

More and more each year, until we can't assimilate them. What is the end result of that? Come on, you know what it is.

Yes, I do. we get new innovation, new ideas.

[Argus]

31 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Yes, my training officer explained it to me. He said his forefathers had too lax an immigration policy back in the 1490's. The result is, in the Canadian Forces (at that time) there was only one First Nations member for every thousand members. That meant that each Indian was responsible for looking after a thousand white guys. He pointed out how lucky we were. He only had to look after 30 of us.[/quote]

Smarmy and unthinking. Grats.

31 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

The problem is numbers. We cannot maintain our wilderness character with so many people. 

No, the problem is we are not having enough children to replace those who are dying.

31 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Yes, I do. we get new innovation, new ideas.

But Western civilization and culture disappears and fades away.

[Queenmandy85]

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

But Western civilization and culture disappears and fades away.

That is a normal process. My ancestors in Britain had their culture erased when the beaker people moved in. Cultures are always blending and changing through migration. If they don't, they stagnate.

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Queenmandy85 said:

That is a normal process. My ancestors in Britain had their culture erased when the beaker people moved in. Cultures are always blending and changing through migration. If they don't, they stagnate.

Not every change is an improvement.

[Queenmandy85]

16 minutes ago, Argus said:

Not every change is an improvement.

True, but that is the way it is in evolution as well. I think the beaker people thought it improved things, not so much the people who were there first, although it made better pottery.

Edited July 8, 2018 by Queenmandy85

[AngusThermopyle]

9 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Yes, my training officer explained it to me. He said his forefathers had too lax an immigration policy back in the 1490's. The result is, in the Canadian Forces (at that time) there was only one First Nations member for every thousand members. That meant that each Indian was responsible for looking after a thousand white guys. He pointed out how lucky we were. He only had to look after 30 of us.

We are hardly disappearing. The population of Canada hes tripled since I was born. The problem is numbers. We cannot maintain our wilderness character with so many people. 

Yes, I do. we get new innovation, new ideas.

WTF are you talking about? There was no CAF in the 1490's, in fact Canada didn't exist as Canada in the 1490's. John Cabot embarked on the Matthew at Bristol on the 20th May 1497. In the 1490's not only did the CAF not exist, there were most certainly not thousands of members. As for the rest of what you post about First Nations members looking after thousands of British members, it's truly not worth answering as it's so far out to lunch it's actually dinner. This training officer of yours was either an idiot, or was trying to see how many idiots he could bull shit.

[betsy]

18 hours ago, Argus said:

So I was reading a review of Denis Arcand's film The Decline of the American Empire - which has nothing to do with the US, btw. It's actually about Quebec. One part of the review struck a chord and seemed worth discussion.

"While the exact circumstances of societal breakdown might differ somewhat according to location, at the core of what’s killing our communities, in Mr. Arcand’s telling, is the cult of the individual and the death of collective values. We live for nothing and no one but ourselves and the fleeting pleasures and possessions we spend our time pursuing."

This echoed themes I've read and heard from others of late. With the fall of religion, and the falling out of fashion of patriotism, with families reduced to perhaps two to three individuals instead of the huge, multi-generational mob that was the norm even back fifty years ago (I had eighteen uncles and aunts when I was a child, and they all had multiple kids) there doesn't seem to be any sense of belonging to something, of striving for something, of unity. Nothing binds us together as a community or as people. We're increasingly alone in our world, with nothing to care about but ourselves.  And what do our community leaders do about it? Make it worse, usually. Trump divides America. Trudeau insists that Canada is a 'post nation state' with no unifying theme, culture or values other than tolerance of different people. Both of them disdain religion and religious values. Over in Europe, I don't see anything better. in the UK, May is an idiot, and the opposition leader is a lunatic of the far left. In France, the opposition leader is on the far right while the PM fumbles. Russia and China are led by brutal dictators. 

So if there is no white knight on he horizon how do we save ourselves?

Of course Trump divides America.  With opposing ideologies - left and right - of course, there will be division! We have to be thankful that in the USA, there is STILL A DIVISION.  I see the positive aspect of that division.  That means, change is still possible.

 

Whatever change happens in the USA under Trump............will eventually find its way to Canada.  That is the silver lining for a Canadian like me.

 

Trump is the white knight in the horizon.  Look at what he's trying to achieve regarding religion (which of course entails family and values),  and good old fashion patriotism.  He's trying to change the world.  How much he'll achieve, we don't know.  It might be too late.....we don't know.

 

I'm surprised he's going to UK next week, for 3 days!  I thought that trip has been shelved.  That, to me, shows that no matter how they try to marginalize him........ he is a leader that just can't be ignored. 

 

Having said that, I understand the frustrating, and the depressing picture the current landscape gives us.  Birthing a "new" nation, isn't easy.

Edited July 9, 2018 by betsy

[Queenmandy85]

7 hours ago, AngusThermopyle said:

WTF are you talking about? There was no CAF in the 1490's, in fact Canada didn't exist as Canada in the 1490's. John Cabot embarked on the Matthew at Bristol on the 20th May 1497. In the 1490's not only did the CAF not exist, there were most certainly not thousands of members. As for the rest of what you post about First Nations members looking after thousands of British members, it's truly not worth answering as it's so far out to lunch it's actually dinner. This training officer of yours was either an idiot, or was trying to see how many idiots he could bull shit.

I apologize for the lack of clarity. He was my training officer in 1982. His point was the First nations of the Americas should not have let immigrants in beginning in 1492.

In 1982, each indian in the CAF had 1000 white men to look after. In our Department, there were only 30 of us so we benifited with more one on one attention. He was one of the best cops I've ever known.

[turningrite]

18 hours ago, Argus said:

We are dying out, as a people. You don't think that's symptomatic of anything?

You talk about all those immigrants. Why do we need immigrants? Because we're dying out? We're not breeding? People aren't bothering to have children. What is the end result of that, not just here but throughout the West? Come on, you know what it is.

So we bring in immigrants, people from non-Western cultures, mostly, with non Western values. More and more each year, until we can't assimilate them. What is the end result of that?

I think the issue of declining birth rates has a lot to do with economics rather than cultural or social breakdown. My parents raised a large family mainly on my father's income, although my mother worked part-time in some of his business ventures, mainly doing bookkeeping. And, by the way, my father had no post-secondary education or qualifications. My parents bought a house when I was a toddler, the mortgage for which was paid off in ten years, and during my elementary school years they paid cash for a cottage. And we were pretty middle-of-the-road middle class. These days, obtaining such a lifestyle would likely be considered upper middle class.

Interestingly, between my siblings and me, four of us completed post-secondary education, but none of us has achieved a standard of living comparable to that my parents had. Few these days can own a house without two full-time incomes and without paying a mortgage for twenty-five years or more. I think it necessary to note that over the past four or five decades, and particularly over the past couple decades, the cost of housing, in particular, has risen substantially in comparison to individual incomes. This, along with transformations in labour markets that have generated increased competition and bid up the length of post-secondary education required for many jobs (i.e. "qualifications inflation"), has served to slow household formation, increased the average age of mothers having children, exponentially increased external child care costs and effectively capped family size, at least in households with working parents of ordinary means. The resulting impacts on income distribution and on asset and wealth accumulation are at the root of declining natural population growth. I believe that the characteristics now labeled as social decline are really symptoms of a deliberate economic transformation with immigration policy being another aspect of this same agenda.

[AngusThermopyle]

35 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I apologize for the lack of clarity. He was my training officer in 1982. His point was the First nations of the Americas should not have let immigrants in beginning in 1492.

In 1982, each indian in the CAF had 1000 white men to look after. In our Department, there were only 30 of us so we benifited with more one on one attention. He was one of the best cops I've ever known.

I still have no idea what you're talking about. I was a member of the CAF in 1982. There were no Natives looking after anyone, in fact there were extremely few anywhere in the forces and they certainly weren't looking after a thousand men, or any men for that matter. The very few that I met were like any other member, just members working their way up like everyone else. If you were in the CAF why would you have a cop as a trainer. All training in the CAF is handled by CAF members. It was that way in 82 and it's still that way to this day.

As for not letting immigrants in, what the hell was he smoking? They had no choice in the matter, they were conquered, simple as that. They didn't magnanimously say "hey lets let these people move in". They couldn't have stopped them if they'd tried, and many did try.

[Queenmandy85]

1 hour ago, AngusThermopyle said:

I still have no idea what you're talking about. I was a member of the CAF in 1982. There were no Natives looking after anyone, in fact there were extremely few anywhere in the forces and they certainly weren't looking after a thousand men, or any men for that matter. The very few that I met were like any other member, just members working their way up like everyone else. If you were in the CAF why would you have a cop as a trainer. All training in the CAF is handled by CAF members. It was that way in 82 and it's still that way to this day.

As for not letting immigrants in, what the hell was he smoking? They had no choice in the matter, they were conquered, simple as that. They didn't magnanimously say "hey lets let these people move in". They couldn't have stopped them if they'd tried, and many did try.

Wow. Lighten up. I've never claimed to have been in the military. I don't count a stint in the reserves as any military experience. I was referring to my training as a Community Peace Officer and the Constable I was referring to was making a joke. If I have to explain a joke, then that is my bad for not telling it very well. You take things so seriously. I'm sorry. 

[Argus]

19 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

True, but that is the way it is in evolution as well. I think the beaker people thought it improved things, not so much the people who were there first, although it made better pottery.

No doubt. The problem is that in this context we are the people already here, not the beakers.

Edited July 9, 2018 by Argus

[Argus]

6 hours ago, betsy said:

Trump is the white knight in the horizon.  Look at what he's trying to achieve regarding religion (which of course entails family and values),  and good old fashion patriotism.  He's trying to change the world.  How much he'll achieve, we don't know.  It might be too late.....we don't know.

Oh come on. If Trump is a white knight, he's a white knight with his helmet on backwards and holding the wrong end of his lance.

As for religion, which he manifestly does not believe in,  the idea this lifelong, unrepentant fornicator, gambler, cheater, bully, braggart, liar and serial adulterer is going to represent family values should be enough to make righteous people gag.

[Argus]

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I apologize for the lack of clarity. He was my training officer in 1982. His point was the First nations of the Americas should not have let immigrants in beginning in 1492.

And he's clearly right. We destroyed them. Now you seem to be saying it's only right we allow ourselves to be similarly destroyed. Karma, neh? And we should be content with that.

[AngusThermopyle]

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

 

In 1982, each indian in the CAF had 1000 white men to look after.

Maybe don't post incorrect information such as this then. Or if you do maybe indicate that it's nothing but crap put into words. That way people will know, or at least have some idea of what you're trying to say.

[Argus]

2 hours ago, turningrite said:

I think the issue of declining birth rates has a lot to do with economics rather than cultural or social breakdown. nda.

There's no evidence to support this. In fact, poor people in Canada have more children than middle class people. And there's absolutely no sign that the really better off, be they the upper middle class or rich, have more children than the middle class. Furthermore, in really poor countries, they tend to have the most kids. So no, I think it's cultural, a lack of importance placed on having children, a lack of a sense of obligation, and a sense that children are expensive, troublesome, and distract from ones main purpose in life, which is self-enjoyment through the acquisition of nicer 'stuff'.

[paxamericana]

Just now, Argus said:

And he's clearly right. We destroyed them. Now you seem to be saying it's only right we allow ourselves to be similarly destroyed. Karma, neh? And we should be content with that.

Nope RESIST! Rage against the dying of the light! Honestly you Canadian just need a new sense of patriotism and identity. Develop some moral backbone. I know where my moral backbone comes, it's the constitution of the United States of America. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

[bush_cheney2004]

7 minutes ago, paxrom said:

Nope RESIST! Rage against the dying of the light! Honestly you Canadian just need a new sense of patriotism and identity. Develop some moral backbone. I know where my moral backbone comes, it's the constitution of the United States of America. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

 

Exactly....many Americans would be just as concerned if they were being overrun with Canadians and their "Canadian values"...starting with the right to own and bear arms.

"The Decline"...is relative.

Edited July 9, 2018 by bush_cheney2004

[turningrite]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

There's no evidence to support this. In fact, poor people in Canada have more children than middle class people. And there's absolutely no sign that the really better off, be they the upper middle class or rich, have more children than the middle class. Furthermore, in really poor countries, they tend to have the most kids. So no, I think it's cultural, a lack of importance placed on having children, a lack of a sense of obligation, and a sense that children are expensive, troublesome, and distract from ones main purpose in life, which is self-enjoyment through the acquisition of nicer 'stuff'.

Well, I've provided a link (below) to an article that largely sustains my opinion.  The article discusses the clear relationship between economic factors, including economic insecurity, and fertility. It also discusses the changes in fertility rates causes by the increasing participation of women in the workplace over the past few decades and the resulting delay in family formation and childbirth. It's axiomatic that women in poorer countries tend to have more children, but in many of these countries traditional gender roles prevail and living costs remain very low. There is little market-based pressure not to pursue larger families and in fact in many of these places having children (mainly male children) is seen as a form of social security because the state doesn't serve that purpose. But immigrants from these countries who migrate to advanced economies for employment tend to quickly adapt to the economic realities of the countries to which they move and their fertility rates fall more or less in tandem. In other words, social and cultural factors are no match for economic factors where declining fertility and birth rates are concerned.

The reason why poor parents (including poor immigrant parents) tend to have more kids than do middle class parents in Canada is that they're insulated to a greater degree than others from the vagaries of the free market economy. In many cases, they're sustained on public subsidies and even incentivized by public policy to have more children. It's an artificial outcome based on income redistribution that actually exacerbates fertility decline among middle class families, who have to pay high taxes, high living costs and high child care costs as well as pay the freight to raise their own children.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/birth-rate-stalls-after-recession-hurting-economic-growth-1.2635048

Edited July 9, 2018 by turningrite

[betsy]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

Oh come on. If Trump is a white knight, he's a white knight with his helmet on backwards and holding the wrong end of his lance.

 

You probably stereo-type the "white knight" you have in mind.  Trump doesn't fit your mould.  He's a "diamond in the rough."  

It's what he's aiming to accomplish - and how he's influencing the world -  is what makes him the "white knight."

 

 

Quote

As for religion, which he manifestly does not believe in,  the idea this lifelong, unrepentant fornicator, gambler, cheater, bully, braggart, liar and serial adulterer is going to represent family values should be enough to make righteous people gag.

 

Aw c'mon Argus.  We've been through all that at your thread in Religion, and I'd already rebutted that.   That kind of reasoning is what's making you seem childish sometimes.

Edited July 9, 2018 by betsy