How progressives want to control our lives

[blackbird]

"

Next up, the Liberals are exploring options to bring in environmental regulations for clothing. The cost of clothes has actually gone down in recent years, so leave it to Ottawa to look for ways to bring the cost back up and to limit options.

There is also the plan to essentially force Canadians to purchase electric vehicles, that nobody would otherwise want, through government mandates to phase out the sale of gas-powered cars and trucks.

On a larger scale, the government is attempting to restrict the kind of work people do, specifically work in the oil and gas industry, through steep emissions targets, which will close off lucrative job opportunities in western oilfields. It will also limit the kinds of fuels people will be able to use to heat their homes.

There are also policies that the Canadian government hasn’t implemented, but which green activists have endorsed, such as the banning of gas stoves and the ludicrous suggestion from some academics that “climate lockdowns” be implemented to help cut emissions.

It is possible to be supportive of all these policies, despite their paternalistic and job-killing nature, but pretending that no one is trying to, or that no one wants to, interfere with our liberty is not a credible position to take.

Of course, it isn’t just environmental policy where governments are invading private spaces and limiting personal liberties.

The proposed Online Harms Act would allow anyone to make a human rights complaints about “hate speech,” or, practically, any speech they find offensive. Supporters may try to say that only the most egregious forms of expression would be targeted, but the fact is truth is no defence in this legislation and the definition of hate speech is highly subjective. What’s more, human rights law is less rigorous than criminal law for determining “guilt.”

I guess we should be thankful the government didn’t do what it initially wanted by banning “misinformation,” which has quickly come to mean anything the Liberals disagree with. Even so, the political nature and the speech-chilling potential of the Online Harms Act are clearly evident.

And, there’s more.

The federal government’s national daycare plan is currently making it difficult for private daycare owners to operate, thereby limiting not only business opportunities and jobs, but the options parents have.

The same is true for health care, where even the slightest hint of privatization is met with progressive rebuke, even when it means limiting choices that would save someone’s life.

Finally, at the provincial level, schools have or once had policies in place to withhold health information from parents, specifically when children may be suffering from gender dysphoria. Mandates from the Alberta and New Brunswick governments to require parental notification of, or consent for, changes to a child’s name or pronouns have been met with progressive face melting. Activists think such information should be withheld absent any evidence of abuse.

Despite what the preening, raging, social media mobs say, parents have the right to raise their children free of state interference. Teachers and administrators do not have the right to withhold health information.

Of course, children are not the property of parents, but we don’t grant autonomy to children, especially younger children. The people best placed to make decisions for minors are their parents, and unless there are signs of abuse, teachers and school administrators should not be assuming that role. It is kind of bewildering that this even needs to be said.

A generation ago, the culture wars centred around a handful of issues that were met with resistance from mostly religious advocates, specifically abortion and gay rights.

Today, the culture wars are pitted between those who want to impose ever more restrictions on individuals and those who are tired of it."

National Post

Carson Jerema: Progressives want to control our lives, and Canadians have had it (msn.com)

Edited August 31, 2024 by blackbird

[Chrissy1979]

RFK Jr. is among the most extremist environmentalists you'll ever find. He has already cut a deal to be in Trump's cabinet. What did that deal entail?

[Queenmandy85]

On 8/30/2024 at 8:38 PM, blackbird said:

On a larger scale, the government is attempting to restrict the kind of work people do, specifically work in the oil and gas industry, through steep emissions targets, which will close off lucrative job opportunities in western oilfields. It will also limit the kinds of fuels people will be able to use to heat their homes.

You ignore transitioning to nuclear power. There are far more jobs to fill if we transition to nuclear power, electrify and rebuild the rail system, and export reactors and fuel around the world. It is a licence to print money and the centre of it is in  Canada, especially in Canada. It can save us from the greenhouse effect and help us preserve our petroleum, coal and iron ore reserves for future generations.

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

You ignore transitioning to nuclear power. There are far more jobs to fill if we transition to nuclear power, electrify and rebuild the rail system, and export reactors and fuel around the world. It is a licence to print money and the centre of it is in  Canada, especially in Canada. It can save us from the greenhouse effect and help us preserve our petroleum, coal and iron ore reserves for future generations.

Any kind of transition of society has to happen naturally by society itself, not by government decree.  Government cannot transition society just by waving a magic wand.  During a process of transition, which would likely take a very long time, things would have to happen in a way that would keep society fully employed, earning a good income, and remain prosperous.  That would require companies to be at the forefront and changes would have to make sense.  Companies would have to be profitable along the way.  There is no such thing as a government just decreeing that everything shall change on a given date.  That is impossible and would never happen.

[Queenmandy85]

Governments can expedite the transition. Examples are the transcontinental railway that bound Canada together and the ramp up in the Second World War. 

[Michael Hardner]

28 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Governments can expedite the transition. Examples are the transcontinental railway that bound Canada together and the ramp up in the Second World War. 

"Government can't transition society" is the biggest "I give up" you can offer.  Legislation transitions society, period.  How much it does is a matter of scale.

The most basic service that a collective offers is defence, since the dawn of human civilization.  I would say having a peaceful and secure society that can pursue prosperity is transformative.

 

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Governments can expedite the transition. Examples are the transcontinental railway that bound Canada together and the ramp up in the Second World War. 

How is that possible without even knowing how every person will hold a good-paying job to support his family?  We live in expensive times with high rent, high mortgage payments, groceries, etc.   And radical environmentalists and NDP just want to shut down the energy industry without any equally high-paying jobs to go to.  It's nuts.  

We have to be practical.  Private industry creates jobs and prosperity, not government by government decree.  Let's see all the good jobs created by private industry before shutting anything down or doing any kind of harm to what we have.

When the railways were built, they didn't try to destroy other industries to build them.  So you are comparing apples to oranges.

[blackbird]

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Governments can expedite the transition.

 

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

"Government can't transition society" is the biggest "I give up" you can offer.

So you two want to turn Canada into a Communist state by having the government totally change society by destroying the fossil fuel industry and creating a green industry/economy.  That would take what in effect would be a Communist revolution much like the Russian Communist revolution.  How did that work?   There were widespread shortages of everything right up until the system collapsed about 1989.  The Communist created almost a century of misery for the people, while the leaders lived in relative comfort and had everything they needed.  

Government can't just pass a law to create an vast economy and prosperity.  That Socialist or Communist idea has been tried and shown to be a failure.

You are talking about business and companies to provide jobs and the products we all need.  Yet you are willing to surrender your freedoms to allow government to implement what is in effect a Marxist or state run country. 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

 

So you two want to turn Canada into a Communist state ...

I stopped reading right there. 

You're such a non-starter...