Is Canada becoming a Communist state?

[Dougie93]

12 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 A U.S. demise means that Canada and other nations will no longer have the big stick they have relied on to enforce the "rules based order", and if this is inevitable what Canada should have done may be quite different.

it's not even a question of American demise

the American Hegenomy will end, all Hegemons have an arc

but rumours of America's imminent fall are as usual greatly exaggerated

none the less, the empire is not expanding anymore, the empire is in contraction now

so this leaves Canada more & more out in the cold along the way

America First, America no longer has the excess capacity to prop free loaders like Canada up

so Canada is courting the Chinese, hoping that they will be Canada's new overlords

Asiatic is merely coincidental, Canada needs overlords to tie Canada's shoe laces,  wherever Canada can find them

[Dougie93]

what is amusing is how the Liberal Philosopher Kings have drank their own America is doomed bath water

inciting them to make themselves cronies of Beijing prematurely

turns out Xi Jinping is the real Stalin and Canada is now caught between him & Washington

nice to see Canada twisting in the wind by its own delusional hand, just desserts for the cultural Marxist turncoats

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

what is amusing is how the Liberal Philosopher Kings have drank their own America is doomed bath water

inciting them to make themselves cronies of Beijing prematurely

turns out Xi Jinping is the real Stalin and Canada is now caught between him & Washington

nice to see Canada twisting in the wind by its own delusional hand, just desserts for the cultural Marxist turncoats

 

This has happened before...Trudeau the elder did the exact same thing with China to counter Nixon back in the early 1970's.    The American 20th century is over and global dynamics are different from the polar aligned world of that time, and China won't be anybody's bitch anymore.

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

This has happened before...Trudeau the elder did the exact same thing with China to counter Nixon back in the early 1970's.    The American 20th century is over and global dynamics are different from the polar aligned world of that time, and China won't be anybody's bitch anymore.

Indeed, Cold Warriors have been here before, it's back to the Seventies, maaan

Marshall McLuhan's war mind you, Information War

the Soviets were basically just a giant military funded by oil

the Chinese are a much more sophisticated predator

 

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, GrittyLeftist said:

 If someone else wants to be a different gender, how does that harm anyone?  If gender becomes a fashion statement, once again, who is harmed? 

It can cause a lot of harm by spreading this false ideology of choosing gender to children, who become very conflicted. It can destroy their lives, make it impossible to have a family and a normal life.  They could end up committing suicide as many do.  Some may opt to seek escape from the mess with alcohol or drugs and O. D. on fentanyl.  It also causes division and stress to families who have children who pursue changing their gender.  There is a father in jail now who refuses to accept the authorities and judge's direction to keep silent about his daughter transitioning to a boy.  People into that sort of thing are doing their best to spread their lifestyle and changing gender to other young people and society at large.  It also can cost the medical system a lot of money as more people seek psychiatric care and drugs or sex change surgery.  Teaching that to kids in school is the just the beginning of an ongoing disaster.

Edited May 20, 2021 by blackbird

[bush_cheney2004]

2 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

the Chinese are a much more sophisticated predator

 

Agreed...China is not our grandfather's communist regime...far more sophisticated than before.   All it lacks is superpower experience, and there is only one way to get such experience.   Canada is feeling the burn.

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, blackbird said:

It can cause a lot of harm by spreading this false ideology of choosing gender to children, who become very conflicted. It can destroy their lives, make it impossible to have a family and a normal life.  They could end up committing suicide as many do.  Some may opt to seek escape from the mess with alcohol or drugs and O. D. on fentanyl.  People into that sort of thing are doing their best to spread their lifestyle and changing gender to other young people and society at large.  It also can cost the medical system a lot of money as more people seek psychiatric care and drugs or sex change surgery.  Teaching that to kids in school is the just the beginning of an ongoing disaster.

it's all part of the larger false idolatry

whether you believe in a literal God or not, the Western World was the Christian world

but Canada has become Nietzschean, God is dead for all intents & purposes Canadian Confederation related

so this paganistic cult of the Woke has quickly entrenched itself in that Canadian spiritual vacuum

it's satanic in the sense that it is Anti-Christ and obsessed with imposing degeneracy upon the culture

this is merely a symptom, the larger cause is the breakdown of social & family bonds, atomization by internet

[Dougie93]

5 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Agreed...China is not our grandfather's communist regime...far more sophisticated than before.   All it lacks is superpower experience, and there is only one way to get such experience.   Canada is feeling the burn.

since Canada is inherently corrupt and all Canadian governance is a rubric for bribery

China has easily weaponized its $3.84 trillion US dollar forex reserve

the Canadian Liberal elites are easily bought by Beijing to sell Canada down the river, nary a shot fired

[GrittyLeftist]

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

Dancing around in painted faces and war costumes seems harmless on the surface but it is really a retrogressive harkening back to a heathen culture.  Let's be honest.  Many aboriginal cultures around the world involved murder, warring with neighbouring tribes, and various barbaric practices including cannibalism.  That's what missionaries put their lives at risk to travel to remote jungles in Borneo, Indonesia, Africa and other places to take the message of Jesus  Christ and the gospel of salvation for the aboriginal people.  Today we have modern man dressed in suits, living in fancy homes, and driving expensive cars who do not believe the gospel and prefer to support aboriginals returning to their heathen ceremonies and politicians supporting them.  Not all aboriginals agree with this and there are some who have been saved out of the darkness and embraced the gospel.  An example is the Tribal Trails Christian broadcast out of Saskatchewan.

Good thing they had the Europeans to teach them not to murder, war with other tribes (List of conflicts in Europe - Wikipedia), or engage in any "barbaric" practices, especially cannibalism (Human cannibalism - Wikipedia).

'A form of cannibalism popular in early modern Europe was the consumption of body parts or blood for medical purposes. This practice was at its height during the 17th century, although as late as the second half of the 19th century some peasants attending an execution are recorded to have "rushed forward and scraped the ground with their hands that they might collect some of the bloody earth, which they subsequently crammed in their mouth, in hope that they might thus get rid of their disease."'

 European priests were good people who would never torture people to death for doubting their religion (Inquisition - Wikipedia), or burn women and girls at the stake because they're witches (Witch-hunt - Wikipedia).  Europeans would also never treat, say, the Irish, as though they were sub-human (Anti-Irish sentiment - Wikipedia).  Europeans would certainly never practice genocide (The Holocaust - Wikipedia).  The Indigenous peoples of the world were just simple, savage heathens until the Europeans came along and civilized them (Colonialism - Wikipedia).  The fact that some modern Indigenous people have come to identify with those who civilized them is proof that this was ethical and enlightened - when has anyone ever come to identify with someone who was trying to harm them (Stockholm syndrome - Wikipedia)?  

[Shady]

Trudeau’s censorship legislation is the latest example of the drift toward totalitarianism.

[blackbird]

1 minute ago, GrittyLeftist said:

Good thing they had the Europeans to teach them not to murder, war with other tribes (List of conflicts in Europe - Wikipedia), or engage in any "barbaric" practices, especially cannibalism (Human cannibalism - Wikipedia).

'A form of cannibalism popular in early modern Europe was the consumption of body parts or blood for medical purposes. This practice was at its height during the 17th century, although as late as the second half of the 19th century some peasants attending an execution are recorded to have "rushed forward and scraped the ground with their hands that they might collect some of the bloody earth, which they subsequently crammed in their mouth, in hope that they might thus get rid of their disease."'

 European priests were good people who would never torture people to death for doubting their religion (Inquisition - Wikipedia), or burn women and girls at the stake because they're witches (Witch-hunt - Wikipedia).  Europeans would also never treat, say, the Irish, as though they were sub-human (Anti-Irish sentiment - Wikipedia).  Europeans would certainly never practice genocide (The Holocaust - Wikipedia).  The Indigenous peoples of the world were just simple, savage heathens until the Europeans came along and civilized them (Colonialism - Wikipedia).  The fact that some modern Indigenous people have come to identify with those who civilized them is proof that this was ethical and enlightened - when has anyone ever come to identify with someone who was trying to harm them (Stockholm syndrome - Wikipedia)?  

Of course the Holy Roman Inquisition which lasted for about 400 years was a great evil that killed millions of people. There have been many evils done in the name of Christianity or religion;  however this does not negate the truth of the Bible or gospel which was taken to heathen nations.  There has been much savagery in various parts of world.  It is nonsense to suggest aboriginal culture is somehow something to be admired or encouraged, without knowing what all it entails.

[blackbird]

2 minutes ago, Shady said:

Trudeau’s censorship legislation is the latest example of the drift toward totalitarianism.

I don't think Trudeau is going to get very far with that.  There are likely many people and groups anxious to challenge it in the courts.  Seems like he wants to start a civil war over basic freedoms.  

[Dougie93]

the totalitarianism is a sign of panic amongst the Liberal elites

used to be they could tolerate dissent, because they felt secure behind the Canadian Iron Curtain

but now Marshall McLuhan's Information War is breaking into Canada over the tops of the ramparts

so now the Committee for State Security is feeling desperate

[Dougie93]

at this point, only Chairman Justin Trudeau and his politburo of Gerald Butts & Katie Telford can be trusted to rule

all laws, polices, regulations & narratives come fully formed out of the PMO

the Philosopher King and his Triumvirate will save Canada from American freedom, with the help of Beijing

[Michael Hardner]

22 minutes ago, blackbird said:

1. It can cause a lot of harm by spreading this false ideology of choosing gender to children, who become very conflicted.
2. It can destroy their lives, make it impossible to have a family and a normal life. 
3. There is a father in jail now who refuses to accept the authorities and judge's direction to keep silent about his daughter transitioning to a boy.   

1. vs keeping them home and teaching them that evolution is true, vaccines are bad etc.  This is why home schooling should be taken away from unqualified teachers.  If it's a comfort, imagine the horrors of some hippie family keeping their kid home and teaching them about peace in love.  That one ought to give you nightmares.

2. Like the Christian runaways who end up on the streets of my city... gay kids shunned or the famous Mormon lost boys...

3. I heard that he recently expressed regret for his actions.  It was contempt of court and disobeying a judge that got him in trouble, I do believe.

Please teach your children your values in a PUBLIC context and not in spite of community standards.   It's hypocritical to demand others follow the law and refuse to do the same.

[Dougie93]

9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

 If it's a comfort, imagine the horrors of some hippie family keeping their kid home and teaching them about peace in love.  That one ought to give you nightmares.

I'm flipping to the peacenik side now

tho I was indoctrinated to mass murder for Victoria Regina Imperatrix

that was when we were standing on a trace against totalitarianism,

I would not recommend carrying a rifle for Canada anymore, Canada has become a Potemkin Village

it's not worth getting killed for, it's not worth killing for neither, fool's errand

Edited May 20, 2021 by Dougie93

[GrittyLeftist]

17 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I won’t go point by point, but a few main issues: Indigenous policing on reserves is already prevalent.  You can’t have a different set of criminal laws on reserves unless it becomes illegal to leave reserves.  A two-tier justice system is a recipe for disaster.  We could have a whole conversation about the additional fishing, hunting, and other liberties Indigenous enjoy.  A lot of looking the other way happens on smuggling through cross-border reserves.

If you allow reserves to veto all resource and national or provincial infrastructure projects, many if not most national and provincial rail, highway, energy, mineral, and environmental protection projects won’t happen.  There are good reasons why interprovincial projects are subject to federal approval rather than provincial and band council, because otherwise the “Not in my backyard” contingent would make it impossible to have viable trade routes, resource development, manufacturing, and employment.  It would basically turn Canada into a completely uncompetitive backwater.  We saw quite successful attempts to do this over LNG and other pipelines in B.C.    Canada struggles to utilize her own resources and distribute the benefits to her own peoples, Indigenous included.

Again, you have said unceded many times but haven’t identified who has the right or legal title to cede the lands.  In most cases surveyors and settlers entered and settled territories because there were no apparent claimants.  I agree that where a legitimate land claim can be made, it’s the prerogative of the claimant to take their evidence to court, but you seem to assume that there are homeless people sitting on sidelines waiting to get their territory back.  Establishing title that far back is hard to prove and becomes more dubious the more claimants come forward and the farther back in time one has to reach for evidence.

I definitely acknowledge that most of the ideas I raised are implausible and farfetched by today's standards.  That said, we currently have federal, provincial and municipal laws, seems adding "reserve" laws would be an extension on what we already have.  We have federal, provincial, and in some cases municipal Police forces, adding a "reserve" force would just be an extension of this.  Haha we already have a two-tier justice system - those who can afford the best legal help get one standard of justice, and the rest of us get another one.  
If cops are ignoring smuggling going through cross-border reserves, they aren't doing their jobs and should be replaced by cops who will do their jobs.  Police corruption is a serious problem that I wish society took more seriously
The problems you describe about resource development are very real.  Maybe we could gain their consent by offering them a share of the benefits?  I dunno.  Maybe they would dig in their heels and not budge on anything and nothing would get done.  Maybe it would be chaos.  The difficulty you describe is real.  That said, maybe Canada should have considered this before choosing to break its own laws.  
According to Canadian law, unceded land is the sovereign territory of whichever people had it before Canada arrived.  You are correct that it is problematic to try to figure out, today, who owned which land a couple of hundred years ago.  Once again, Canada should have considered this before choosing to break the law.

[GrittyLeftist]

8 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Zeitgeist and Gritty have embarked on that rare thing: an interesting, informed and edifying discussion on here.  Unfortunately Canada's relationship with its first peoples is barely related to the topic so maybe I can offer something to tie it back.

Marxism has this concept called 'reification', which I roughly understand to be the process of turning abstractions into something real.  For example, money is an abstraction of exchange between people that has turned into something thought to be 'real'.

The tie-in is that the problems you mention could be solved if we do what the 80s corporate types called "thinking out of the box".  That is, to realize that legalities, ownership, symbols of power are meaningless contrivances that should be discarded the moment they fail to serve the common good.  So, "ceding of land" or even ownership and custodianship are "in the box" ideas that, themselves, could stand in the way of truly creative problem solving.
 

 

Thanks!  Very flattering.  Zeitgeist is really doing a great job of making me rethink assumptions - I've started to make claims several times and then thought, "wait, am I actually *sure* of that?" and then gone and researched them and, whoopsie, I was wrong!  Super useful to me and I'm very grateful because there are only a couple of people I can safely have these conversations with IRL and I already know what they'll say.

Reification (Marxism) - Wikipedia I had forgotten about that!  Wow, reification is super abstract.  I'm gonna have to think about that for a while, maybe watch some videos.

I like your approach.  I have a maxim I try to remember - "When your opponent offers you two targets, strike at a third.  When your opponents offers you two options, create a third.  If you ever think you are doing what your opponent expects, do something else instead."  In this context, my opponent is... I dunno, "the establishment?"

Quote

 Instead we have fake "we care about everybody" Liberals and fake "we are smart and pragmatic" Conservatives who are basically the same.  They are especially similar in their limited vision.

Wish I could upvote this more than once.  That may be the most concise, fair, and devastating critique of Canadian politics I've ever heard in two short sentences.  

[Zeitgeist]

30 minutes ago, GrittyLeftist said:

I definitely acknowledge that most of the ideas I raised are implausible and farfetched by today's standards.  That said, we currently have federal, provincial and municipal laws, seems adding "reserve" laws would be an extension on what we already have.  We have federal, provincial, and in some cases municipal Police forces, adding a "reserve" force would just be an extension of this.  Haha we already have a two-tier justice system - those who can afford the best legal help get one standard of justice, and the rest of us get another one.  
If cops are ignoring smuggling going through cross-border reserves, they aren't doing their jobs and should be replaced by cops who will do their jobs.  Police corruption is a serious problem that I wish society took more seriously
The problems you describe about resource development are very real.  Maybe we could gain their consent by offering them a share of the benefits?  I dunno.  Maybe they would dig in their heels and not budge on anything and nothing would get done.  Maybe it would be chaos.  The difficulty you describe is real.  That said, maybe Canada should have considered this before choosing to break its own laws.  
According to Canadian law, unceded land is the sovereign territory of whichever people had it before Canada arrived.  You are correct that it is problematic to try to figure out, today, who owned which land a couple of hundred years ago.  Once again, Canada should have considered this before choosing to break the law.

No offence but you have to learn more about these issues.  There are extensive laws regarding resource ownership and development on reserves.  There are already reservations forces.  Nunavut is an ideal Indigenous run territory with title over resource development.

Treaties are also highly varied.  Land claims must always be assessed on a case by case basis by courts.  I don’t hold your lack of information against you.  I have more to learn too.  It does explain why it’s so easy to manipulate the public when it comes to Indigenous affairs.  It’s a complex topic with few easy solutions.  

Edited May 20, 2021 by Zeitgeist

[GrittyLeftist]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Do you think it's ok for leftists to ignore the crimes of Stalin ?  

Oops - I saw the Flyers and forgot this.  No I don't think that's okay.  I also think the left has to have some kind of answer for "look what Communism did in Russia and China, why would you want to institute it here?"  For me, that argument would be "Russia and China did not have Communism, they had brutal authoritarian governments that pretended to be Communist."  Your mileage may vary and I respect that.

[Dougie93]

7 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

It’s a complex topic with few easy solutions.  

another of Canada's fool's errands

excuse me while I go back to grilling steaks on my deck with an ice cold beer & watching playoff hockey

let the Mounties deal with the indigenous, that's what Mounties are for, since 1885

 

[GrittyLeftist]

3 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

You missed my point, which is that Canada isn’t all about any single group.  We all compromise a bit because of the multiplier effect and cross-pollination of ideas that comes from the dialogue and combined talents of all individuals and groups.  The result, hopefully, is a strong, innovative, generous, and harmonious country that can stand on its own two feet.  

Thanks, now I get it!

[GrittyLeftist]

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Don't you think that if anyone could tell , do, act upon or believe what ever they want that it would cause total confusion. While at home you should have that freedom, but outside in public, here is a few problems, take the gender issue for instance, there has been cases of fathers being taken to court by the school districts for not calling his son, daughter as he wanted..., the case is in front of the justice system right now, proof that one can be harmed by the law.. or it has consqences....at one time it was thought the world was flat and we could sail off the edge, until science proved other wise... so why is this topic any different why have we disregarded any requirement to have it based in science or facts?  We seem to have shit tones of topics that we either let slip by as being harmless, or just don't have the time or energy to prove them wrong with facts, and in our laws....like anti vaxers and much more...

Second, we used to have everything taught in our school based on facts or proven by science not only is gender issues being taught in school , but it has a become fact in our laws, but has not been based on science or facts...It is getting crazy out there, and we don't need to encourage any more crazy... 

Yes by me preferring to be a fire truck as a gender is harmless, until someone goes to court, or the same person grows tired of being called a fire truck and wants to change it when they grow up, or more to the point having parents approve surgical operations to change gender, when science has already said the human brain is not fully developed until 20 or 25 not sure of the exact age...and maybe this is all just a young child being confused...So harm can be done, both by the law and surgically.

School districts have sued parents for not using the gender address their child preferred?  That seem pretty outrageous.  I just did some googling but couldn't find anything about that.  Can you please provide some evidence to support this claim?

I'm not really sure how to base this in science.  I mean, the question seems to be "should people be allowed to choose their own gender?"  No wait, maybe this question is, "should our schools teach kids that gender can be changed?"  I dunno, like I said I don't have a dog in this fight.  Science can't tell us what we should value.  I could see something where maybe you have to reach the age of majority before you can decide what your gender is?  That's something the courts could resolve.

Lol "fire truck as a gender" thanks for the chuckle.

FWIW, if people can change gender, it would seem to follow that they can change back if they choose (assuming we have the science for that).

Good point about "maybe this is a young child being confused."  Maybe this is something that should wait for the age of majority?  

[Army Guy]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. vs keeping them home and teaching them that evolution is true, vaccines are bad etc.  This is why home schooling should be taken away from unqualified teachers.  If it's a comfort, imagine the horrors of some hippie family keeping their kid home and teaching them about peace in love.  That one ought to give you nightmares.


3. I heard that he recently expressed regret for his actions.  It was contempt of court and disobeying a judge that got him in trouble, I do believe.

Please teach your children your values in a PUBLIC context and not in spite of community standards.   It's hypocritical to demand others follow the law and refuse to do the same.

1. And yet here we sit, with all this gender issues being taught in our classrooms by "qualified teachers" for years now...Who decided that a the few genders we had were not adequate, and is any of this backed up by science.  That a person can be one of hundreds of genders what ever they choose to be... or is this just a theory that seemed to grow from social opinion or group opinion. 

3. How did he end up in court any way, there must have been an initial charge. and if so what was it ? I'm hearing it was he refused to call his son daughter, and if that is the case, for a law to be declared, one would think all of this has been proven by science or facts some how... i ask because i truly do not know and interested in how all of this came about...how we went from a few genders to as many as we need to cover everyone fantasies.

[Dougie93]

one of the critical imperatives of Communism is to overthrow bourgeois social mores

so Trans is just another cudgel for the Canadian Bolsheviks to beat the peasants over the heads with

you're not down for radical social engineering by authoritarian central planning ?

that makes you a Kulak, Comrade

 

Edited May 20, 2021 by Dougie93