Pearson, 1956, Suez - Canada Should Leave NATO 2023

[August1991]

If you are curious, check any Youtube video about Nasser.

He was an Egyptian,  an Arab nationalist. He died in 1970.

More relevant: the 1956 Suez crisis and Pearson's role. 

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, August1991 said:

If you are curious, check any Youtube video about Nasser.

He was an Egyptian,  an Arab nationalist. He died in 1970.

More relevant: the 1956 Suez crisis and Pearson's role. 

Canada is never going to leave NATO

because Canada has no foreign policy of its own

Canada is still just a colony

once a colony of the British Empire

handed over to the Americans in 1916 when the British Empire broke itself at the Somme

thus Canadian Confederation is not even capable of making decisions at the level of geopolitics

[ExFlyer]

5 hours ago, August1991 said:

If you are curious, check any Youtube video about Nasser.

He was an Egyptian,  an Arab nationalist. He died in 1970.

More relevant: the 1956 Suez crisis and Pearson's role. 

What is this about??

[Zeitgeist]

5 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

Canada is never going to leave NATO

because Canada has no foreign policy of its own

Canada is still just a colony

once a colony of the British Empire

handed over to the Americans in 1916 when the British Empire broke itself at the Somme

thus Canadian Confederation is not even capable of making decisions at the level of geopolitics

Canada made some bold moves and sacrifices.  It has so much potential, but it no longer feels like our governments are serving Canadians, especially the federal government. We’ve woken up to overcrowded cities with rising violence and governments pushing ideology that most sensible people would never want for their families or communities.

It’s as though some group took Trudeau into a room at gunpoint and said, “You’re going to bring in millions of people, raise the cost of living, make it impossible for young people to buy homes, make people ashamed of Canada, and shame people who try to maintain a sense of human dignity.  Give everyone that which is destructive: drugs, poverty, promiscuity, suicide, and shame.  Make sure the country shuts down the development of its greatest strength, resource development. Saddle everyone with so much debt that our safety net becomes unaffordable.  Ban protests and backstop it all with increased government powers and looser rules for the application of martial law.  We’ll make sure you stay in power by stoking fear and manipulating the public, and when we return you can step aside so we can take what we want.”

These are the effects of a naïve activist government that’s totally disconnected from most people’s reality and needs.

It increasingly feels like Canadians are on the losing end of a mad social engineering experiment.

Edited September 2, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[Dougie93]

8 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

.It increasingly feels like Canadians are on the losing end of a mad social engineering experiment.

indeed

and I would submit that the mad experiment has a name

it's called Communism

this is what Communism is like and why it is so inherently diabolical

[Zeitgeist]

12 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

indeed

and I would submit that the mad experiment has a name

it's called Communism

this is what Communism is like and why it is so inherently diabolical

Yup.  It’s dawning on those who understand history and the hard won features of democracy that we are in a cultural revolution.

The problem is that people are either too busy, uninformed, or manipulated to do much about it.  They think they’re preventing global warming or keeping trans kids from committing suicide or liberating people of colour or Indigenous from their middle class capitalist colonial oppressors.

Too many people don’t understand the value of what we seem to be throwing away.  They’ll know when it’s gone.  The direction of the country has to change.  We were in much better shape 8 years ago.  I wonder why…We’re well on our way to destroying the middle class and the Canadian Dream.

Edited September 2, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[Dougie93]

6 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Yup.  It’s dawning on those who understand history and the hard won features of democracy that we are in a cultural revolution.

it's really America's cultural revolution being imposed upon Canada

the difference is really that America is designed to withstand these upheavals

America can fight a total war of annihilation against itself, it still come out the other side intact

whereas weak and fractured Canadian Confederation is not able to withstand this

so Canada ends up being the nexus of the mad experiment by default

[Dougie93]

16 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

The problem is that people are either too busy, uninformed, or manipulated to do much about it.  They think they’re preventing global warming or keeping trans kids from committing suicide or liberating people of colour or Indigenous from their middle class capitalist colonial oppressors.

that's generally confined to a new upper class

the Professional Managerial Elite

if you talk to any working or lower middle class person, they know exactly what is going on

thing is, Canada is not a republic

there is no public rule in Canada

so once an elite has seized control of all the institutions, there is no mechanism to unseat them 

[Dougie93]

58 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

We’re well on our way to destroying the middle class and the Canadian Dream.

but what is the "Canadian Dream" ?

you can live the American Dream in Canada

but I don't think Canada is actually built around an idea like that

Canada is more of an ad hoc cobbled together Confederation of convenience

there is no central idea of Canada for the masses to rally around

when Canadians rally around ideas now, those are all imported ideas from America

tale for example "leaving NATO"

that's not a Canadian idea, and it would not in any way be in Canada's interests

that's an entirely American idea;  America Firsters

it might be in America's interests to abandon NATO

but Canada would end up being one one of the abandoned therein

Canada is not capable of defending ten million square kilometres of territory

nor is Canada capable of defending its trade on the high seas

Collective Security is Canada's only and entire military strategy

Edited September 2, 2023 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Too many people don’t understand the value of what we seem to be throwing away.  They’ll know when it’s gone.  The direction of the country has to change. 

it all goes back to 1982

the successful Canada as British North America was ended

and replaced with a new state

which is actually completely detached from our history & system of governance

so this "Canada" you live in now is only forty years old

this system of governance is completely unproven

and is actually a radical experiment oblivious to the unintended consequences

this is where you end up with what Americans call the "Fake Country"

or as I call it, the People's Republic of Canada

the Canada Act 1982 is a deeply flawed document full of poison pills

which has resulted in the worst of both worlds, no public rule, but also no British rule of law

from Jordan Peterson's Op-Ed in the National Post

The decline and fall of Canada

Why does the situation appear particularly grim, here in Maple Leaf Country? We were, for most of my country’s history, miraculously and thankfully dull: our constitution, ensconced safely under British authority until 1982, enshrined “peace, order and good government” as the most basic principles of our dominion. This was not the clarion call ringing out to rally our good friends south of the border, who aimed at the much more dramatic and libertarian “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” It was good enough, however, to produce a reliable, safe, secure and free state, conservative in the classic small-c sense, with institutions both predictable and honest, and an economy both productive and generous.

That all started to change in the 1980s. Our dashing prime minister, Pierre Elliot Trudeau — father of the current Prime Minister, our current clown prince — was searching desperately for a legacy and for a solution to the chronic problem posed by the Quebec separatists, who were genuinely threatening the integrity of the country. Quebec was the last feudal country in the West: extremely traditional and dominated by a very small, tight, essentially hereditary elite right until the end of the 1950s. Quebec dumped all that in a few short years in a fit of 1960s freedom, also dropping its birth and marriage rate with exceptional rapidity (both are now among the lowest in the world) and abandoning the Catholic church in favour of a crude nationalism and a more-or-less socialist utopia favoured by those who pushed to also tear apart the country.

Trudeau senior, constitutionally displeased with the fundamental derivation of Canada from Britain, seized upon this opportunity to make his mark in history, and began to agitate to “bring the constitution home.” He did so, rewriting our primary legal agreement, and appending to it his much-vaunted Charter of Rights and Freedoms, paraded before Canadians as the ultimate guarantee of the freedoms we had enjoyed anyway under the much more reliable aegis of British Common Law. But Quebec put up its middle finger, refusing to become a signatory to the new agreement – even after Trudeau’s government abandoned both its spine and its principles to include a poison pill in the very Charter that hypothetically protected our citizens: the clause in Section 33 of that document, indicating that those very constitutional rights can be abridged more or less at will by any government in Canada, federal or provincial, if inclined to do so.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jordan-peterson-canada-is-trampling-on-my-god-given-right-to-free-speech

although Section 1 is worse than Section 33

Section 1 is where your rights are  rendered meaningless by vague & specious rhetoric

what is "reasonable" in a "free and democratic society" ?

that's actually subjective rather than objective

this renders your rights into a matter of opinion rather than fact

so you have no rights, so long as public opinion is against you

which is actually the opposite of what a bill of rights is supposed to achieve

Edited September 2, 2023 by Dougie93

[myata]

Looks who's droning the same agenda chug chug. Disarm, run to pick daisies in the meadow and face smiley-friendly Xi and Vlad, on each side? Some are just naive, but hard to believe in these cases. More likely, someone somewhere is pulling a string, or a few. The kind of patriotic new Canadians" we get by a shipload these days.

[suds]

10 hours ago, August1991 said:

If you are curious, check any Youtube video about Nasser.

He was an Egyptian,  an Arab nationalist. He died in 1970.

More relevant: the 1956 Suez crisis and Pearson's role. 

Yeah I get it. Be neutral, sit on the fence, become the world's arbiter..... and be respected for it. That might work and it might backfire. As I've said before, with foreign affairs (as with life) you have to pick a side. Because if you don't and the shit hits the fan in your own backyard... don't automatically expect anyone to bail you out.

[Dougie93]

1 hour ago, myata said:

. More likely, someone somewhere is pulling a string, or a few.

I would suggest that the opposite is actually the case

if plots were being hatched in smoke filled back rooms, you would notice movement in some direction

this is more like nobody is actually in charge, the ship of state is drifting towards the shoals unattended

[myata]

9 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

this is more like nobody is actually in charge

Except if and when one is in a desperate spot and pulling all strings randomly. Russia is burning its cheap cannon fodder to put of the military defeat; but it's also rising the steam of despair in anger at home. At some point, the two will meet. That destination is known very well in their dark and useless history it's no secret to anybody. So no string should be spared.

[Dougie93]

12 minutes ago, suds said:

Yeah I get it. Be neutral, sit on the fence, become the world's arbiter.....

indeed

this is one of Canada's most crippling pathologies

the fool's errand of trying to be the "honest broker" in great power security competition

otherwise known as the Peacekeeping Myth

which sadly replaced Canada's greatest myth, the Vimy Myth

the nation forged in fire on the Western Front  to win the Great War for civilization itself

 

[suds]

3 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

although Section 1 is worse than Section 33

I find the exact opposite. Section 1 recognizes the idea that no rights are absolute. Section 33 is the abomination. The Charter certainly isn't perfect. But I see it this way...  if the US had to rewrite it's constitution (the way the country is so polarized today), it would likely end up with something similar or it would never happen.

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, suds said:

I find the exact opposite. Section 1 recognizes the idea that no rights are absolute. Section 33 is the abomination. The Charter certainly isn't perfect. But I see it this way...  if the US had to rewrite it's constitution (the way the country is so polarized today), it would likely end up with something similar or it would never happen.

Section 33 is a blunt instrument which incites a reaction even in docile Canada

Section 1 is subtle, and so gets away with things that could never be done under Section 33

[Dougie93]

14 minutes ago, myata said:

Except if and when one is in a desperate spot and pulling all strings randomly. Russia is burning its cheap cannon fodder to put of the military defeat; but it's also rising the steam of despair in anger at home. At some point, the two will meet. That destination is known very well in their dark and useless history it's no secret to anybody. So no string should be spared.

Putin is at this point presenting as "fake news"

he's appears to be nothing more than a self preserving kleptocrat with no ideology

because there are so many other levers the Kremlin could pull to impose escalation dominance

yet they are timid

if Adolf Hitler was running Russia

we'd have Russian nuclear submarines severing the underwater communications and pipelines by now

yet there is no escalation, the Kremlin just keeps plodding away trying to secure the totally insignificant Donbass

[suds]

3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Section 33 is a blunt instrument which incites a reaction even in docile Canada

Section 1 is subtle, and so gets away with things that could never be done under Section 33

I can't disagree. But what happens when rights conflict as in a great many cases the courts have to render a decision on? If rights were absolute a decision would be next to impossible. So they try and do a balancing act.

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, suds said:

I can't disagree. But what happens when rights conflict as in a great many cases the courts have to render a decision on? If rights were absolute a decision would be next to impossible. So they try and do a balancing act.

but the judiciary is not to be trusted

because they have embraced the idea of a "living constitution"

which is really just a euphemism for evermore unconstrained government interference in every aspect of life

the courts in Canada only rule one way in this day & age

and that is almost in every case in favour of the state against the individual

unless it is an absolutely glaring miscarriage of justice, the courts will rule in favour of the government

and so again, it's subtle, yet unyielding, your liberties just keep getting chipped away at incrementally

and on the long view, it is only going in that direction

[suds]

The idea of perfect constitution doesn't exist. Or if one did, why did the US have to add so many amendments?  Supreme courts aren't perfect either. Or why did the US supreme court have to overrule previous supreme court rulings over 300 times? Nothing is ever set in stone (or should be). Not even the constitution.

[suds]

24 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

and so again, it's subtle, yet unyielding, your liberties just keep getting chipped away at incrementally

I get the same feeling at times. But constitutions belong to the people. If you object to the way things are going then stand and be heard.

Edited September 2, 2023 by suds

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, suds said:

I get the same feeling at times. But constitutions belong to the people. If you object to the way things are going then stand and be heard.

heard by whom ?

if the judiciary is against me, then I am basically screwed

[ExFlyer]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

heard by whom ?

if the judiciary is against me, then I am basically screwed

No one listens to losers. You will never be heard. LOL

[suds]

22 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

heard by whom ?

if the judiciary is against me, then I am basically screwed

You can always appeal. But if the supreme court doesn't agree with you, then yeah....  you're basically screwed. You could always write letters to your elected officials, or get a sign and protest (but no swastika's). Get more politically active. Politicians and other elected officials tend to not like being publicly embarrassed so maybe protesting is your best bet. And of course we always have the vote.

Edited September 2, 2023 by suds