Jump to content

Advice to Poilievre: Canada is a good country, Appeal to higher angels


Recommended Posts

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

This is what populism does: enrages the peasants to enlist them in installing the bourgeoisie as the government.  Then kills them and let's the rest go back to sleep.  

It is a rare populist who can enrage people who are not already angry. In most cases what they do is harness existing anger and direct it at the government. Or if they're the government, then at someone else.

People are not angry because of anything Poilievre has said or done. They're angry because of shitty healthcare, impossible to afford homes and rents and rising food costs while the government throws away millions and billions on buying votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, I am Groot said:

1. It is a rare populist who can enrage people who are not already angry. In most cases what they do is harness existing anger and direct it at the government. Or if they're the government, then at someone else.

2. People are not angry because of anything Poilievre has said or done. They're angry because of shitty healthcare, impossible to afford homes and rents and rising food costs while the government throws away millions and billions on buying votes.

1. Sure.
2. Oh, you think the anger is VALID.  Well, for the purposes of this conversation only: I don't care.  You can talk about weather patterns or complain about how cold it is, those are two different conversations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

1. Sure.
2. Oh, you think the anger is VALID.  Well, for the purposes of this conversation only: I don't care.  You can talk about weather patterns or complain about how cold it is, those are two different conversations.

This topic is about advice to Poilievre. And the advice of 'be nice and appeal to people's niceness' has never worked politically and never will. That's why  no one uses it. Not the Liberals, not the NDP, not the Greens, not the BQ and not the Tories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

1. This topic is about advice to Poilievre.
2. And the advice of 'be nice and appeal to people's niceness' has never worked politically and never will.
3. That's why  no one uses it. Not the Liberals, not the NDP, not the Greens, not the BQ and not the Tories.

1. Sorry, yes, I may be drifting this...
2. I just realized that you are a lot younger than me.  Nobody who voted in a Bill Davis election would have said that.
3. You don't think Justin started out as Mr. Nice Guy ?  Those evil socks ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Sorry, yes, I may be drifting this...
2. I just realized that you are a lot younger than me.  Nobody who voted in a Bill Davis election would have said that.
3. You don't think Justin started out as Mr. Nice Guy ?  Those evil socks ?

Strike never and substitute 'has not worked in decades'. It's a different world. No, Trudeau started out blaming 'the rich' and promising to take more money from them and give it to the more 'deserving' middle class. He appealed to people's resentment and greed. His time in office has been marked by him blaming people for various improper ways of thinking and behaving in order to curry favor with specific identity groups. Or to draw in another topic you and I were just discussing, to make things sound worse than they are to Muslims and then set himself up as their protector. "Look at how much danger and hatred of Islam there is! Only I care about you. Only I can protect you! Vote for me!"

People seem to always be calling out populism from the Right but largely ignore it on the Left. Perhaps because our society and culture have been influenced by the revelations of how evil the Nazis were but has never taken in how evil the Communists were to the same degree. 

Edited by I am Groot
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Jordan Peterson is brilliant.  Your criticism of him is shallow and ill-informed.  I’m glad you reveal your ignorance.

I used to admire Jordan Peterson 5-6 years ago (back when he was actually still making academic arguments and focusing on things like free speech).  He's undoubtedly smart, but he uses this gift to cash out on grievance-peddling, and he's a total charlatan now.  I suspect he'd be happy to lose his psychology license, as this sort of "martyrdom"  would undoubtedly endear him to his audience of incels and other ignorant losers.  

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

People are not angry because of anything Poilievre has said or done. They're angry because of shitty healthcare, impossible to afford homes and rents and rising food costs while the government throws away millions and billions on buying votes.

I bet they're just as uninspired. People are angry because everything is becoming less sustainable.  PP says Canada is broken but it's actually the world that's breaking down.

Now that sustainability issues are getting closer to the ground where people can't help but notice and the anger starts turning to fear politicians won't have much if anything left to work with either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

1. Strike never and substitute 'has not worked in decades'. It's a different world.
2. No, Trudeau started out blaming 'the rich' and promising to take more money from them and give it to the more 'deserving' middle class.
3. He appealed to people's resentment and greed. His time in office has been marked by him blaming people for various improper ways of thinking and behaving in order to curry favor with specific identity groups. Or to draw in another topic you and I were just discussing, to make things sound worse than they are to Muslims and then set himself up as their protector. "Look at how much danger and hatred of Islam there is! Only I care about you. Only I can protect you! Vote for me.
4. People seem to always be calling out populism from the Right but largely ignore it on the Left. Perhaps because our society and culture have been influenced by the revelations of how evil the Nazis were but has never taken in how evil the Communists were to the same degree. 

1. Check

2. Really ?  I don't remember anything like that but ok.

3. Ok, this is about you not liking Trudeau.  I have no opinion on that.  But it's generally a good idea to box your emotions and put them aside when doing analysis.  Neither Trudeau nor Poilievre get me angry... I would say Poilievre appeals more to the "angry Canadian" than Trudeau but it's hard to compare traditional politics with populism.

4. I will never acknowledge Trudeau as being "on the left".  The NDP, sure, but not him.  As such, left-wing populism died with Huey Long et. al.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

I used to admire Jordan Peterson 5-6 years ago (back when he was actually still making academic arguments and focusing on things like free speech).  He's undoubtedly smart, but he uses this gift to cash out on grievance-peddling, and he's a total charlatan now.  I suspect he'd be happy to lose his psychology license, as this sort of "martyrdom"  would undoubtedly endear him to his audience of incels and other ignorant losers.  

I disagree. I DO agree that he's veered into dumb places a lot since his near death experience with antidepressants. But he doesn't need to cash out anything. The guy has been raking in millions since he became a public figure. And I might point out that one of the things he's often been quoted as saying is that more money does not bring more happiness. That once you have enough money to pay the bills and live a decent enough life extra money is largely unimportant.

He still can make some very interesting and worthwhile points. I recently saw an interview/discussion between him and Glen Loury where they discussed the problem of people with really low intelligence, and what place there might be for them in the world (almost none). And how that accounts for like ten percent of the population. Quite interest.

As for the 'incel' comment, which is a kind of routine insult flung his way I really don't see it. His number one  theme is that people, esp men, need to take responsibility for themselves, need to clean up their lives, do something worthwhile. And that a man who doesn't is worthless to women. I've never heard him blame women for anything. As far as I know his view is if women don't want you that's almost certainly your own damn fault and you should change the way you act and behave. Women don't like weaklings and whiners. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

1. I used to admire Jordan Peterson 5-6 years ago (back when he was actually still making academic arguments and focusing on things like free speech).  He's undoubtedly smart, but he uses this gift to cash out on grievance-peddling, and he's a total charlatan now.  

1. He's a complete fraud and believes his own publicity.  Imagine you are going to debate a renowned Marxist scholar in front of the world, and you don't read ANY of Marx's political & economic work "Das Kapital" and instead read the 23-page call to arms "The Communist Manifesto".  Then you go to the debate and talk about Marx at length.

I would fail a high school student for such a stunt, and yet this is where we are with our intellectuals today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Check

2. Really ?  I don't remember anything like that but ok.

It was his main campaign plank in 2015.

https://www.reuters.com/article/cnews-us-canada-politics-trudeau-idCAKBN0NP1RP20150504

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

3. Ok, this is about you not liking Trudeau.  I have no opinion on that.  But it's generally a good idea to box your emotions and put them aside when doing analysis.

Don't make assumptions. You're putting the cart before the horse and assuming I don't like Trudeau and so am criticizing his policies. Isn't it just as likely that I believe his policies have been bad and deliberately divisive and that is why I don't like him?

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

4. I will never acknowledge Trudeau as being "on the left".  The NDP, sure, but not him.  As such, left-wing populism died with Huey Long et. al.   

What do you regard as being on the Left? Castro? Trudeau has largely absorbed the policies of the NDP. And I make a distinction here between the federal NDP and its western counterparts. The federal NDP is the creature of college academics and public sector unions. It couldn't care less about blue collar workers, who don't speak their language and have often offensive views. It cares primarily about identity politics - same same as the Liberals.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. He's a complete fraud and believes his own publicity.  Imagine you are going to debate a renowned Marxist scholar in front of the world, and you don't read ANY of Marx's political & economic work "Das Kapital" and instead read the 23-page call to arms "The Communist Manifesto".  Then you go to the debate and talk about Marx at length.
 

Ok, this is about you not liking Peterson.  I have no opinion on that.  But it's generally a good idea to box your emotions and put them aside when doing analysis.

Are you suggesting Peterson has never read Marx?

Edited by I am Groot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

I used to admire Jordan Peterson 5-6 years ago (back when he was actually still making academic arguments and focusing on things like free speech).  He's undoubtedly smart, but he uses this gift to cash out on grievance-peddling, and he's a total charlatan now.  I suspect he'd be happy to lose his psychology license, as this sort of "martyrdom"  would undoubtedly endear him to his audience of incels and other ignorant losers.  

 

 

Maybe you don’t like Peterson now that he’s standing up to the woke mob that’s created a chill over free speech and turned university campuses into EDI indoctrination centres.  Basically he is one of a few brave as yet uncancellable voices.  Liberal Arts education is gone. University debates are finished.

I experience this movement first hand in the workplace. People are saying what they don’t believe out of fear.  I feel sorry for the vast majority of people who don’t have Jordan’s platform and influence who have been canceled and silenced.  Parts of the US left are taking up the cause of defending academic freedom and keeping ideologues from imposing political agendas on faculty and curriculum. However, Canadians have folded under the pressures of this inquisition. Our Constitution seems to be too weak and/or the courts, media, and the stakeholder capitalists running our corporations are reinforcing the groupthink identity politics.

If you don’t believe the woke-green orthodoxies in Canada, as defined top-down by government Ministries, you’re a sitting duck.  Even Peterson is struggling to escape the wrath.

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

1. What do you regard as being on the Left? Castro? Trudeau has largely absorbed the policies of the NDP. And I make a distinction here between the federal NDP and its western counterparts. The federal NDP is the creature of college academics and public sector unions. It couldn't care less about blue collar workers, who don't speak their language and have often offensive views. It cares primarily about identity politics - same same as the Liberals.

1. Take identity politics out, then examine economic policies with regards to nationalization, taxation and so on.  I can concede Trudeau is centre-left at best.  In any case left "populism" was once a real thing and not like today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

1. Ok, this is about you not liking Peterson.  I have no opinion on that.  But it's generally a good idea to box your emotions and put them aside when doing analysis.

2. Are you suggesting Peterson has never read Marx?

1. No, not at all.  I used to like him.  I see what you did there.
2.  His quoting of the manifesto and completely stupid statements would indicate he knows as much about Marx as the other topics he regularly soils himself on like Climate Change.... he's a fraud, ignore him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. No, not at all.  I used to like him.  I see what you did there.
2.  His quoting of the manifesto and completely stupid statements would indicate he knows as much about Marx as the other topics he regularly soils himself on like Climate Change.... he's a fraud, ignore him.

Michael I’m surprised at you.  Peterson worked for the UN and has demonstrated quite deep knowledge of green energy.  He takes Lomberg’s perspective on climate change, which doesn’t deny it exists but brings in important doses of realism regarding what can reasonably be done.  Peterson doesn’t pretend to be an expert on the subject.  I’m not defending his knowledge universally across subjects, but I find it sad that you’re piling on against him without specifics.  This seems to be the pattern.  Did the Star or Globe and Mail tell you he’s a bad guy?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Take identity politics out, then examine economic policies with regards to nationalization, taxation and so on.  I can concede Trudeau is centre-left at best.  In any case left "populism" was once a real thing and not like today.

Which NDP? The Mulcair NDP or the Singh NDP? I'm not aware of any NDP policies on nationalization but the Mulcair NDP vowed fiscal discipline and to be more business friendly. Liberals have raised taxes already on higher earners while lowering it or eliminating it on lower earners. Would the NDP do it more enthusiastically? Perhaps, but the rate is already nearing the limit beyond which talented people leave the country (some already have) and the heads of major companies move their head offices to the US. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. No, not at all.  I used to like him.  I see what you did there.
2.  His quoting of the manifesto and completely stupid statements would indicate he knows as much about Marx as the other topics he regularly soils himself on like Climate Change.... he's a fraud, ignore him.

No. That's not how I work. I ignore him on certain subjects because he sound silly. On psychological topics, though, he sounds quite sensible most of the time. And I believe Marx, and I am far from an expert, produced an unworkable system which ignores human motivation. 

On climate change, he has his opinion just like you do. My opinion tends to be similar to his in that I believe the scientists but also believe the proposed solution brought down by politicians is unworkable and will never achieve anything of substance but increasing poverty levels.

Edited by I am Groot
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Contrarian said:

I don't think your mind would agree

You are the last of the dinosaurs. No, there's none like you left in the developed, modern democratic world. Yes people can read and they can understand "representation" and "representative". No you can't win against evolution with dinosaur arguments. Can always try though, that one is free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

You can always try with "Destroy and Rebuild."

Dinosaur (the last of): "Horror, o horror!!! Destroy and rebuild!"

The rest of the (animal) world: "Look, nothing personal but we're living this way already a million years".

...

By the way, have you seen that one, you know the dinosaur, of late?

The end (evolutionary, dead one)

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

Maybe you don’t like Peterson now that he’s standing up to the woke mob that’s created a chill over free speech and turned university campuses into EDI indoctrination centres.  Basically he is one of a few brave as yet uncancellable voices.  Liberal Arts education is gone. University debates are finished.

That's what I originally liked about Jordan Peterson.  The Lindsey Shephard debacle at my alma mater years ago is what made me aware of him.  When he was making intellectual arguments about freedom of speech and about some of the absurd examples of PC overreach, I vibed with it. 

Then he realized that he could make +$50,000/m validating the vague anxieties and grievances of incels and angry white dudes, and he decided to do that instead.  

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

I experience this movement first hand in the workplace. People are saying what they don’t believe out of fear.

I'm sure it's just awful for you, and that the secret police have your phone line bugged too.  

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. He's a complete fraud and believes his own publicity.  Imagine you are going to debate a renowned Marxist scholar in front of the world, and you don't read ANY of Marx's political & economic work "Das Kapital" and instead read the 23-page call to arms "The Communist Manifesto".  Then you go to the debate and talk about Marx at length.

He's the dumb man's smart man.  Watch one of his videos and you can see it in action.  If he has an opportunity to say, "be cognizant of" instead of just saying, "know" he'll take it.  This sort of pseudo-profound gobbledygook is impressive to a certain type.

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

As far as I know his view is if women don't want you that's almost certainly your own damn fault and you should change the way you act and behave. Women don't like weaklings and whiners. 

and that's just one among many of Jordan Peterson's bizarre contradictions.  Women don't like weaklings and whiners, he says, an they "should be picky", but then the man spends his time and energy talking about how unfortunate and marginalized young white men are, fostering their anxieties and victim complex.  Yay.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

1. I ignore him on certain subjects because he sound silly. On psychological topics, though, he sounds quite sensible most of the time.
2. And I believe Marx, and I am far from an expert, produced an unworkable system which ignores human motivation. 
3. On climate change, he has his opinion just like you do.

1. Ok, sounds good.
2. Well, JP says that Marx didn't talk about "nature" meaning natural resources.  I advise you to go find other critics of Marx, there are many>
3. So he gets a participation trophy... good for him.  Any individual talking out his ass is doing that.  An academic doing that is showing he doesn't understand epistemology - which it is his actual vocation to do, before he practices even...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Ok, sounds good.
2. Well, JP says that Marx didn't talk about "nature" meaning natural resources.  I advise you to go find other critics of Marx, there are many>

I don't care enough about Marx to bother. It's a failed ideology, a failed economic model.

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:


3. So he gets a participation trophy... good for him.  Any individual talking out his ass is doing that.  An academic doing that is showing he doesn't understand epistemology - which it is his actual vocation to do, before he practices even...

What about what he says is incorrect? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,746
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    historyradio.org
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • User went up a rank
      Experienced
    • exPS went up a rank
      Contributor
    • DUI_Offender earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • exPS went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...