Sad When People Purposely Mislabel the NDP

[shoop]

So somebody who isn`t a *social democrat* is advocating a *return to the dark ages*?

I find it very ironic that a thread started out as somebody commenting on people purposely mislabelling the NDP has resorted to such a histrionic outburst by a dyed-in-the-wool ND supporter.

sorry OP

Interesting that we are now experiencing the reversal and return to the dark ages. Interesting, too, how the new cannon fodder for the elites is the group that, like Argus, has been fortunate to raise itself up a notch and needs to feel that there is a sector of society that is beneath them. Strange how humans have always had this need to feel better than others.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[justcrowing]

Let's take a look at today's schools and society, it is filled with sex

education [in schools, books & TV]; political correctness; envirnonmental

extremisim; global unity; diversity training; high order thinking [believing

there are no absolutes]. It is filled with violence, murder, rape, unwanted

pregnancies, drug use, disrespect; foul language and more.

Socialists like to call themselves "liberal", "progressive" and even

"moderate". By changing and shifting their meaning, they hide their true

purpose. Everything will be done under the banners of reform, equality,

social justice, suggesting all was for public good, humanitarian reasons,

true democracy and finally "for the children".

We are not only seemingly losing our freedoms, slowly we are. Are we

walkiing a communist plank under the guise of socialism? The first thing

communists do to expand their power is put the women to work in order to

take over the family unit. Putting them to work separates both parents from

the children so that they can be indoctrinated and propagandized in the

government/socialist schools and preschools. Increasing the workforce also

decreases wages - in the 1950's, the average American family lived fine on

one income. Today the average American family needs TWO incomes just to get

by because the progressive income tax has sapped the earning power from the main male breadwinner and women in the workforce has lowered his earnings. Women in

the workforce and feminism therefore are government tools for creating more

Taxpaying slaves for The State resulting in the enslavement of the average

family unit. Feminists are being used and they don't even realize it. They

have complained about power control freak men and husbands, only to have

this alleged tyranny replaced by an even worst Power-Control-Freak -

government.

On that note - Have a very Merry Christmas.

[cybercoma]

So we trot all the "Protestant Ethic" view of humanity. Something that belongs to the 16th. and 17th. centuries but was coopted by the so-called Capitalists in the 18th. and 19th. to justify the slavery to an economic machine. The 20th. brought an age of enlightment when the working poor became educated and fought back.

Interesting that we are now experiencing the reversal and return to the dark ages. Interesting, too, how the new cannon fodder for the elites is the group that, like Argus, has been fortunate to raise itself up a notch and needs to feel that there is a sector of society that is beneath them. Strange how humans have always had this need to feel better than others.

Interesting, too, to me, is how ignorant of socialism and social democracy the Capitalist trench warriors are. What has Marxism to do with Socialism? Marx developed his own philosophy that was at odds with the Socialists and tried to claim that Socialism was " a step on the way." Actually, he was not far wrong in that. Socialism was a step that would bring the human racr to humanity before the humanity was to be destroyed by Marxism.

There are at least six major variants of Socialism that developed in the 19th. and twentieth centuries through their own philosopher inspirators. None of them recognises Marxism as a goal and. indeed, are more opposed to that philosophy than is Capitalism. Capitalism wants Marxism as a bogeyman to keep the populace in fear and in check. Socialism would completely replace any Marxist strain.

What we have now in the guise of Capotalism is Fascism as Orwell described it. It is the counter atttack of Capitalism on the Unions The Capitalist warriors are a pretty pathetic lot. Not "indoctrinated at university," but baited and hooked by propaganda and fearful enough of losing their "comfort" that they abandon any notion of justice and equality for all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Equality for all is non-existant and will never exist. If you are to force equality, you have to take from some to give to others. In a capitalist society, everyone works for what they have, instead of waiting for handouts from the government. And those who do the taking will never be equal to those they're taking from or giving to.

[scribblet]

...

There are at least six major variants of Socialism that developed in the 19th. and twentieth centuries through their own philosopher inspirators. None of them recognises Marxism as a goal and. indeed, are more opposed to that philosophy than is Capitalism. Capitalism wants Marxism as a bogeyman to keep the populace in fear and in check. Socialism would completely replace any Marxist strain.

What we have now in the guise of Capotalism is Fascism as Orwell described it. It is the counter atttack of Capitalism on the Unions The Capitalist warriors are a pretty pathetic lot. Not "indoctrinated at university," but baited and hooked by propaganda and fearful enough of losing their "comfort" that they abandon any notion of justice and equality for all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Pretty nasty stuff, we know we are not and don't want to return to the 'dark ages'. I'd say the socialist warriers are a pretty pathetic lot, fed on their own propaganda and fearful that anyone else might have a dime more than themselves. We all want less taxation for all, while concern about the under-trodden victim, etc, etc, is not the monopoly of socialists. The best form of welfare is a job.

As for facism, (and next we'll be hearing about Hitler ho hum ) talk about the big bogeyman, its not the right wing today who are fascists, they are the ones who want less government and less social engineering. Hitler was a fascist, a racist and a SOCIALIST. All the great mass-murderers of the past century were socialists, so really, its not just 'nice people' . -

Faith in omnipotent government is misplaced. Monopolies are bad and government monopolies are worse which is why most conservatives want less government interference, not more.

[Guest eureka]

The moment you wrote that Hitler was a Socialist, you disqualified yourself as a serious commentator. When you wrote that "The best form of welfare is a job," you proved that you are a sucker for the neolib propaganda.

You see, everyone knows that the best form of welfare is a job. But, socialists know that the job mus tpay a living wage and that there must be jobs available.

A condition of humanity is that there must be jobs for all and that all must be remunerated at a level that enables to live their lives in dignity and with a sense of self-worth.

[cybercoma]

The moment you wrote that Hitler was a Socialist, you disqualified yourself as a serious commentator. When you wrote that "The best form of welfare is a job," you proved that you are a sucker for the neolib propaganda.

You see, everyone knows that the best form of welfare is a job. But, socialists know that the job mus tpay a living wage and that there must be jobs available.

A condition of humanity is that there must be jobs for all and that all must be remunerated at a level that enables to live their lives in dignity and with a sense of self-worth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There's absolutely no reward for productivity. If doctors were to make the same wages as the guy who flips burgers at McDonald's, why would anyone want the stress of being a doctor? The example is extreme, but to the point of forcing a minimum wage that's inflated. There's no incentive for being more productive, or taking risks, or bettering yourself.

[shoop]

Alas, that is the key. Who decides what wage level allows people to "live their lives in dignity and with a sense of self-worth"? The market finds those people who will do the jobs for the lowest possible expense to the employer.

That is the best way to decide.

A condition of humanity is that there must be jobs for all and that all must be remunerated at a level that enables to live their lives in dignity and with a sense of self-worth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[scribblet]

The moment you wrote that Hitler was a Socialist, you disqualified yourself as a serious commentator.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good debating technique, have to remember that one, could fit it in anywhere.

[Rovik]

Argus:

Interesting slant, but it doesn't wash.

Of course, I can say the same about what you are saying.

The Conservatives get most of their money from individual donaters in small amounts. The Liberals get most of their money from lobbyists and corporate supporters. The Tories are a part of farmers and small businessmen. The NDP are a party of guci wearing, capucino sucking elitists indoctrinated at university. Even the unions are abandoning the NDP, realizing that the NDP don't care about ordinary workers.

As far as I knew, the Conservatives also get quite a bit of money from lobbyists and corprate supporters as well, looks like the Liberals and Conservatives have this in common. I'm curious when the farmers suffered because of drought and later because of the Mad Cow scare, govt. gave a lot of money to the farmers for support, would the Conservatives have done the same. And if so, why did they complain so much about the program that gave money to the fishermen in the mid 90s when the cod fishery was closed down, I wonder. Most of the NDP I know don't fit your stereotype, sorry to say. One of the main reasons why some Union people (and notice i say some such as Buzz Hargrove) slided over the the Liberals was because they tried to push the NDP further left but the NDP leadership refused to do this.

Justcrowing:

Would you consider yourself a average CPC supporter and do you believe most CPCs would back your philosophy?

Scriblett:

In other words a nanny-state. Only nationalized day care is good etc. etc.

In regards to daycare, the not-for-profit is the way to go. Daycare is not cheap, but the subsidies the govt. gives lowers the cost for parents and gives a better wage to workers. For profit daycares would be much more costly for parents and actually be only affordable to the upper middle class and rich and there is no guarentee the workers would have decent wages. Locally, the for-profit daycares pay their workers much less with little or no benefits, the quality is much lower (food, nutrition, and value-added activities for the kids) and costs for the parents are either equal or higher than the not for profit. I know people who have worked locally at both the for profit and not for profit daycares and this is how I know this info.

[shoop]

Any support to contradicting Argus`s claims, or "as far as I know" the best you can come up with?

As far as I knew, the Conservatives also get quite a bit of money from lobbyists and corprate supporters as well, looks like the Liberals and Conservatives have this in common.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Rovik]

Any support to contradicting Argus`s claims, or "as far as I know" the best you can come up with?

Goodness, I guess you must Argus' official defender. One would think that if he would be the one to defend himself not someone else.

Check the Elections Canada site for contributors to the individual parties. You will see that indeed major corporations did contribute to the both the Conservatives and Liberals, well into the millions of dollars. I tried to put links here to the numbers but because of the way they have the database setup, the links won't work.

Perhaps I should have questioned Argus on where he got his information but I never.

[Guest eureka]

Let's take a look at today's schools and society, it is filled with sex

education [in schools, books & TV]; political correctness; envirnonmental

extremisim; global unity; diversity training; high order thinking [believing

there are no absolutes]. It is filled with violence, murder, rape, unwanted

pregnancies, drug use, disrespect; foul language and more.

Let's take a look at yesterday's society, not schools since schools are a result of Socialist pressure) and we can see that it was filled with all those things that are not related to "progress" technologically, too. Only filled to the brim - far worse than today when the civilizing process of Socialism and the gains for the lower (criminal?) classes put many onto a securer place in this world: many who include some of those looking down their noses at their former kin.

[Guest eureka]

That was not debating technique at work, Scribblett. It was an answer to the "statement" that Hitler was a Socialist when the world knows that he was not and to try to make the claim is so ludicrous as to merit no other response.

That one has been debated to death! The Socialist claimants have always been irrational.

[shoop]

How about a quote of some kind?

Not defending him necessarily, just find your claims a little less plausible...

Check the Elections Canada site for contributors to the individual parties.  You will see that indeed major corporations did contribute to the both the Conservatives and Liberals, well into the millions of dollars.  I tried to put links here to the numbers but because of the way they have the database setup, the links won't work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Rovik]

How about a quote of some kind?

Not defending him necessarily, just find your claims a little less plausible...

Check the Elections Canada site for contributors to the individual parties.   You will see that indeed major corporations did contribute to the both the Conservatives and Liberals, well into the millions of dollars.   I tried to put links here to the numbers but because of the way they have the database setup, the links won't work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ok, I got the link to work. Here's the top 50 largest donation to the Conservative party by Businesses/Commercial organizations for 2003. I've tried to get it to work for 2004 but wasn't successful for any of the parties.

Link from Elections Canada

Link

[scribblet]

That was not debating technique at work, Scribblett. It was an answer to the "statement" that Hitler was a Socialist when the world knows that he was not and to try to make the claim is so ludicrous as to merit no other response.

That one has been debated to death! The Socialist claimants have always been irrational.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree socialist claimants are often irrational. But heck, I mean by today's standard he is mainstream Leftist and everything he did was in the name of the 'people'.

"He championed the rights of workers, regarded capitalist society as brutal and unjust, and sought a third way between communism and the free market. In this regard, he and his associates greatly admired the strong steps taken by President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal to take large-scale economic decision-making out of private hands and put it into those of government planning agencies. His aim was to institute a brand of socialism that avoided the inefficiencies that plagued the Soviet variety, and many former communists found his program highly congenial. He deplored the selfish individualism he took to be endemic to modern Western society, and wanted to replace it with an ethic of self-sacrifice: "As Christ proclaimed 'love one another'," he said, "so our call -- 'people's community,' 'public need before private greed,' 'communally-minded social consciousness' -- rings out.! This call will echo throughout the world!" &

And this policy manifesto:

9. All citizens of the State shall be equal as regards rights and duties.

10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. The activities of the individual may not clash with the interests of the whole, but must proceed within the frame of the community and be for the general good.

Therefore we demand:

11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in life and property, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as a crime against the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits whether in assets or material.

13. We demand the nationalization of businesses which have been organized into cartels.

14. We demand that all the profits from wholesale trade shall be shared out.

.................

[scribblet]

How about a quote of some kind?

Not defending him necessarily, just find your claims a little less plausible...

Check the Elections Canada site for contributors to the individual parties.   You will see that indeed major corporations did contribute to the both the Conservatives and Liberals, well into the millions of dollars.   I tried to put links here to the numbers but because of the way they have the database setup, the links won't work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ok, I got the link to work. Here's the top 50 largest donation to the Conservative party by Businesses/Commercial organizations for 2003. I've tried to get it to work for 2004 but wasn't successful for any of the parties.

Link from Elections Canada

Link

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sure they get corporate donations, and the NDP got huge amounts from the unions, but the CPC and prior to that that Alliance majority of donors were individuals.

2004 must not be available yet in that format.

[cybercoma]

Let's take a look at today's schools and society, it is filled with sex

education [in schools, books & TV]; political correctness; envirnonmental

extremisim; global unity; diversity training; high order thinking [believing

there are no absolutes]. It is filled with violence, murder, rape, unwanted

pregnancies, drug use, disrespect; foul language and more.

Let's take a look at yesterday's society, not schools since schools are a result of Socialist pressure) and we can see that it was filled with all those things that are not related to "progress" technologically, too. Only filled to the brim - far worse than today when the civilizing process of Socialism and the gains for the lower (criminal?) classes put many onto a securer place in this world: many who include some of those looking down their noses at their former kin.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So your problem is with enforcing the laws, right? Something the left is not fond of correcting. They need bad people so they can have someone to protect us from.

[cybercoma]

Ok, I got the link to work.  Here's the top 50 largest donation to the Conservative party by Businesses/Commercial organizations for 2003.  I've tried to get it to work for 2004 but wasn't successful for any of the parties.

Link from Elections Canada

Link

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Take a look at line 50 on this page:

http://www.elections.ca/scripts/ecfiscals2...P4&PTY=61&CLS=B

Who is 55555 Inc? And why did they give the liberal party nearly $3 million?

Here's a list of top Business/Commercial contributers:

http://www.elections.ca/scripts/ecfiscals2...B&TOP=10&TPTY=0

If you look at the bottom of that list you'll see Canadian National Railway. Aren't they owned by the government? Or at least subsidized by them? Why then are they giving taxpayer's dollars back to the federal liberal party?

Questions, questions, questions.

Perhaps this merits its own thread, but how could Paul Martin possibly be oblivious to what was going on when a $3 millioni contribution is out there on the books and the next largest is 1/10th of that.

[Argus]

Let's take a look at today's schools and society, it is filled with sex

education [in schools, books & TV]; political correctness; envirnonmental

extremisim; global unity; diversity training; high order thinking [believing

there are no absolutes]. It is filled with violence, murder, rape, unwanted

pregnancies, drug use, disrespect; foul language and more.

Let's take a look at yesterday's society, not schools since schools are a result of Socialist pressure)

Uh, no. Schools, and hospitals, btw, were not the result of socialist pressure. In fact, they were brought about through a fairly wide consensus in the community on the need to educate the young and keep people healthy. Business actually led the way in supporting this, for business increasingly wanted an educated and healthy workforce.

[Argus]

The Conservatives get most of their money from individual donaters in small amounts. The Liberals get most of their money from lobbyists and corporate supporters. The Tories are a party of farmers and small businessmen. The NDP are a party of guci wearing, capucino sucking elitists indoctrinated at university. Even the unions are abandoning the NDP, realizing that the NDP don't care about ordinary workers.

As far as I knew, the Conservatives also get quite a bit of money from lobbyists and corprate supporters as well, looks like the Liberals and Conservatives have this in common.

True enough. The Alliance, and before that the Reform Party had huge party bases, and most of their donations came in small amounts from individuals. Now that the Alliance has amalgamated with the PCs, they are also getting a lot of corporate donations because corporations are amoral. They don't care who wins as long as they have influence with them. So now that the "Conservative Party" has a chance to form a government the corporations are there holding out their hands with money (afterwards, of course, if the Tories get in, they'll be holding out their hands FOR money).

Nevertheless, the backbone of Conservative funding is still individual donations in smaller amounts.

I'm curious when the farmers suffered because of drought and later because of the Mad Cow scare, govt. gave a lot of money to the farmers for support, would the Conservatives have done the same.

It didn't give that much, and it gave it grudgingly and after quite some time. Liberal support for farmers is mainly based on the kind of farmer. For example, dairy subsidies are huge, because most of the dairy industry is in Quebec. Much of the cattle industry is out west, but there are a substantial number in Ontario, too.

And if so, why did they complain so much about the program that gave money to the fishermen in the mid 90s when the cod fishery was closed down, I wonder.

Well, I don't remember, but I could suggest that the cod industry was shut down through federal govenrment incompetence, and that as there was no prospect of it starting up again with any strength in the near or medium term conservatives would have thought giving money to them a waste and countrproductive. That kind of program encourages people to sit pat, when there's nothing to sit pat for. They should have been moving on to other areas.

Most of the NDP I know don't fit your stereotype, sorry to say.

Someone on CTV suggested the other day that Jack Layton spent more on each individual suit than the average Canadian spends on all his clothing in a year. The bedrock of NDP support are the gucci-wearing, upper middle class, wine and cheese eating dabblers who live in comfortable condos and love thinking of themselves as cosmopolitan.

One of the main reasons why some Union people (and notice i say some such as Buzz Hargrove) slided over the the Liberals was because they tried to push the NDP further left but the NDP leadership refused to do this.

Uh huh, so because of their interest in moving left the union leaders moved right? That makes sense - not. However, I do agree that most union leaders are wildly out of touch with their membership and much further to the left than most Canadians, more than willing to screw over their membership in the name of a leftist political agenda.

[Guest eureka]

Not so, Argus. Before the rise of unionism and socialism, there were only a relativeky few hospitals: mostly ill-equipped Charity Hospitals,

The same for schools. The forst school boards came along only after the rise of the same influences. Some areas, even of our "enlightened" societies had no education at all other than that for elites. Britain, foe example, until well into the 19th. century had little more educatioal facilities than the Britain of the 16th. century. Grammar schools where entrance was only for the very bright by examination was the only schooling available in both centuries.

[Argus]

Not so, Argus. Before the rise of unionism and socialism, there were only a relativeky few hospitals: mostly ill-equipped Charity Hospitals,

The same for schools. The forst school boards came along only after the rise of the same influences. Some areas, even of our "enlightened" societies had no education at all other than that for elites. Britain, foe example, until well into the 19th. century had little more educatioal facilities than the Britain of the 16th. century. Grammar schools where entrance was only for the very bright by examination was the only schooling available in both centuries.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are right, and wrong. You have to remember that unionism didn't arise until the industrial revolution. Prior to the industrial revolution there really wasn't a lot of need for large pools of workers, let alone educated workers. And a spread out agrarian society probably isn't suited to hospitals. But as the IR drew people to the cities in huge numbers to work complex machinery the bigwigs saw the need both to prevent plagues (which tended to go hand in hand with masses of poor people jammed tightly together) and to have a more educated work force to work their machines and do sums. I'm not saying socialism, or something related to it, didn't play a part, but industrialization - which btw, helped produce a society where books were plentiful and cheap (and why learn to read elsewise) is mostly to blame.

[Rovik]

[Take a look at line 50 on this page:

http://www.elections.ca/scripts/ecfiscals2...P4&PTY=61&CLS=B

Who is 55555 Inc?  And why did they give the liberal party nearly $3 million?

Here's a list of top Business/Commercial contributers:

http://www.elections.ca/scripts/ecfiscals2...B&TOP=10&TPTY=0

If you look at the bottom of that list you'll see Canadian National Railway.  Aren't they owned by the government?  Or at least subsidized by them?  Why then are they giving taxpayer's dollars back to the federal liberal party?

Questions, questions, questions.

Perhaps this merits its own thread, but how could Paul Martin possibly be oblivious to what was going on when a $3 millioni contribution is out there on the books and the next largest is 1/10th of that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I found that very strange as well. Does anyone know what kind of company this 55555 Inc. is???

[Riverwind]

Who is 55555 Inc?  And why did they give the liberal party nearly $3 million?

It appears it is shell company set up for Paul Martin's leadership bid:

... David Herle controlled 55555 Inc. the shell company formed to collect the donations for Mr. [Martin]'s leadership and single largest contributitor to the Liberal Party in 2003 ($2,974,341.20) was administered out of the offices of the same Ernst & Young office at 100 Queen St. in Ottawa.

link

Has Martin actually published the names of contributor's to his leadership campaign? I remember saying he was going to but never heard anything more. If this information is readily available then Election's Canada should have a link to it. Allowing mysterious numbered companies on the list of political party donors is not exactly transparent.

Note that the Conservative Party also accepts donations from numbered companies so the use of a numbered company is not really an issue. It is the amount that raises questions.