2022 CPC Leadership Discussion: Et tu Redeux

[rmc_wannabe]

Except many of those citizens are also being intimidated by their home country’s government into acting on their behalf or silence. When they report this activity to the police or government, they’re met with a shrug and “Gee, sucks to be you…”

To be frank, a fair amount of these foreign governments (mainly the PRC) do not subscribe to the concept of renouncing Chinese citizenship for another. Its like the Mob; you're in for life and there's no retirement.

Ao when you have that kind of pressure breathing down your neck, and the security apparatus is seen to be either apathetic or complicit with the behaviour, you either shut up or comply to stop the harrassment.

As for @TacticalTea 's points on Multiculturalism; I would say it's not really a sinsiter plot by the Global WEF/Illuminati etc, but was more of a sham to sway non-homogeneous immigrants to chose the Great White North over the Land of The Free.

Remember that "multiculturalism" didn't become a buzz word in Canada until the 1970s, mainly because the traditional "white" European immigrants were staying put, while the new arrivals from the Carribean, South West Asia, and Hong Kong were sticking to their own enclaves.

Path of least resistance to say "you do you" than it is to try and assimilate cultures that very much are non-Eurocentric in everything from politics, faith, values, and even cuisine.

But now its coming to bite us in the ass. When you have New Canadians essentially commiting perjury during their Oath of Citizenship, that is a colossal problem that needs reining in.

 

[Kirkhill]

Remember that "multiculturalism" didn't become a buzz word in Canada until the 1970s, mainly because the traditional "white" European immigrants were staying put, while the new arrivals from the Carribean, South West Asia, and Hong Kong were sticking to their own enclaves.

Not quite true. There was a switch turned on in 1972. Right or wrong, and along with the impulse that saw Canada reject the Union Jack for the Maple Leaf, the government started turning away Europeans in general, Brits in particular, in favour of the rest of the world.

Brits were queuing up to do something other than live in Labour's paradise and join the EEC. They were heading for Australia in their droves. I had members of my own family, well qualified that my father was willing to sponsor and that wanted to join us in Canada, with a young wife and a babe in arms - rejected on points. And he wasn't the only one.

The Europeans weren't staying put. They were stopped.

 

[TacticalTea]

not really a sinsiter plot by the Global WEF/Illuminati

There doesn't need to be a sinister plot for a convergence of dominant interests to produce an end result that favours them, to the detriment of the rest of the world.

But, as you point out, there is in fact an organization that ensures such a convergence occurs, the WEF, and its programs like Young World Leaders, etc.

more of a sham to sway non-homogeneous immigrants to chose the Great White North over the Land of The Free.

Multiculturalism is in effect in almost all Western countries at this point, so a moot point, but also not a historically accurate one.

Trudeau Sr, an intellectual ahead of his time, was a collectivist globalist at heart and his dedication to multiculturalism was much more ideological than as simply practical as you present it.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Most politians of the "left" subscribe to a view of people that buckets people not in nations or cultures, but economic classes. And most of those politicians are not truly interested in flattening the pyramid. That experiment has been run, repeatedly, and failed, repeatedly (and catastrophically).

 

[brihard]

And most of those politicians are not truly interested in flattening the pyramid. That experiment has been run, repeatedly, and failed, repeatedly (and catastrophically).

I think we can say that about any of the politicians in positions of power across the political spectrum. Those who aren’t high up that pyramid seem to quickly end up there once they gain real political influence. Our members of Parliament are paid decent professional salaries, but not more than that- yet somehow many of them end up quite wealthy through the opportunities, insights, and favours they have access to. Whatever they may individually profess about systemic inequalities and inequities, they are, individually and as a class, some of the prime beneficiaries of that inequality. I doubt any of them want to fundamentally reform the system that enriches them.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I doubt any of them want to fundamentally reform the system that enriches them.

Yes, but for conservatives, that's the definition of what they are.

 

[FSTO]

Mea Culpa from Matt Gurney.

Matt Gurney: What I got wrong about Poilievre

I thought he'd steer the party into oblivion. He's on course to win the biggest majority in my living memory.

www.readtheline.ca

Best line:

And that is happening elsewhere, including in the U.S. Men love Pierre Poilievre so much that there basically aren’t enough women voters left to counteract that,” he quipped. “And that was something you could have seen.” He then added, “And it’s not over. You know what’s happening right now? For generations, French-Canadian men have voted like French-Canadians. Now they’re starting to just resemble other Canadian men. And if that happens, that’s a game-changer. It’s happening at the provincial level, too, but I don’t think Trudeau or other progressives thought through the long-term impact of telling millions of men that they’re privileged, no matter their life circumstances. Right now, millions of those voters are shrugging and saying, ‘Well, okay. Fuck you. Me and my privilege will vote for the other guy.’”

 

[QV]

Matt Gurney and a lot of Army.ca members will have crow to eat if PP holds this path. It wasn't too long ago that the prevailing sentiment was PP is a right wing zealot that will destroy the party.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Matt Gurney and a lot of Army.ca members will have crow to eat if PP holds this path. It wasn't too long ago that the prevailing sentiment was PP is a right wing zealot that will destroy the party.

Much of that is people just absorbing the propanda ("conventional wisdom") of people with opinion platforms, boosted by a heavy dose of mood affiliation.

 

[QV]

Much of that is people just absorbing the propanda ("conventional wisdom") of people with opinion platforms, boosted by a heavy dose of mood affiliation.

Sure. And lacking the ability to read the room. The majority of people are just sick of the bullshit now.

 

[Remius]

N

Matt Gurney and a lot of Army.ca members will have crow to eat if PP holds this path. It wasn't too long ago that the prevailing sentiment was PP is a right wing zealot that will destroy the party.

not too many people here said that HE was a zealot. Just that he catered to the zealots.

 

[ArmyRick]

Matt Gurney and a lot of Army.ca members will have crow to eat if PP holds this path. It wasn't too long ago that the prevailing sentiment was PP is a right wing zealot that will destroy the party.

I will be frank. Many people on army.ca may not recognize their own indoctrination or institutionalization. It is what probably led to their own distrust or dislike of PP.
-If your in the Forces full time, you have an obscured view of the world (I really didn't recognize this in myself until I stopped reg force and class B and C service)
-If you work for the government on any level (Never had to worry about your cheque during the lockdown for example)
-If your in a union (I was for a years in civy life and quickly realized how much our sub-local was used to mostly back the other bigger sub-local, probably why we would cheer the NDP at the meetings and then in private all agree we were never voting NDP)

Basically recognize your own biases.

I was accused of being a "fan boy" but I am very non-partisan (I have stated many times the different parties I have voted for and ten years ago, I was labeled a lefty), he is the ONLY sensible choice for Canada. WE should give him a majority and if he fucks up, we all fire his ass.

 

[ArmyRick]

N

not too many people here said that HE was a zealot. Just that he catered to the zealots.

He doesn't

 

[QV]

N

not too many people here said that HE was a zealot. Just that he catered to the zealots.

I'm going to enjoy all the qualifying. "Welllll technically......"

 

[OldSolduer]

This. Is. Gold.

 

[Remius]

I'm going to enjoy all the qualifying. "Welllll technically......"

Or step up and prove it. But you won’t.

You clearly experience things differently.

 

[TacticalTea]

I will be frank. Many people on army.ca may not recognize their own indoctrination or institutionalization. It is what probably led to their own distrust or dislike of PP.
-If your in the Forces full time, you have an obscured view of the world (I really didn't recognize this in myself until I stopped reg force and class B and C service)
-If you work for the government on any level (Never had to worry about your cheque during the lockdown for example)
-If your in a union (I was for a years in civy life and quickly realized how much our sub-local was used to mostly back the other bigger sub-local, probably why we would cheer the NDP at the meetings and then in private all agree we were never voting NDP)

Basically recognize your own biases.

I was accused of being a "fan boy" but I am very non-partisan (I have stated many times the different parties I have voted for and ten years ago, I was labeled a lefty), he is the ONLY sensible choice for Canada. WE should give him a majority and if he fucks up, we all fire his ass.

Working for the government leads to the genesis of one's own bureaucratic personality.

It is characterized by an attachment to the status quo due to the normative effects of routine, a deference to rules and norms over innovation and efficiency because one needs to satisfy quantitatively defined objectives rather qualitative objectives, and adherence to institutional orthodoxy: you don't want to be the black sheep in the organization, you want to be accepted and either make no waves or move up in the hierarchy, which both require a degree of conformity.

Coupled with above-average intelligence, one would find a way to rationalize any current situation so as to mitigate any risk of change.

 

[ArmyRick]

Working for the government leads to the genesis of one's own bureaucratic personality.

It is characterized by an attachment to the status quo due to the normative effects of routine, a deference to rules and norms over innovation and efficiency because one needs to satisfy quantitatively defined objectives rather qualitative objectives, and adherence to institutional orthodoxy: you don't want to be the black sheep in the organization, you want to be accepted and either make no waves or move up in the hierarchy, which both require a degree of conformity.

Coupled with above-average intelligence, one would find a way to rationalize any current situation so as to mitigate any risk of change.

I said to simply recognize your own biases. Thats the important part.

If you ask me, should anyone vote for Trudeau beyond partisan and cult reasonings? Hell yes. He has been pretty generous to federal government employment and many contractors (not just arrivescam related) who have benefitted. Outside that circle? Pretty hard pressed to see why someone would continue to vote for Trudeau.

As for all your long winded explanation of military members (Basically they get 'er done and play as part of a team, summed it up for you) its still important to take a view as to how non-military folks view things (like 90% of Canadian population)

 

[QV]

Or step up and prove it. But you won’t.

You clearly experience things differently.

Prove what? That there was a significant population on this forum disparaging PP at the outset of his run for leadership and bemoaning after he took over the party? I'm not going through 156 pages to crop out the massive amount of negativity. Those who know, know.

 

[Remius]

Except

Prove what? That there was a significant population on this forum disparaging PP at the outset of his run for leadership and bemoaning after he took over the party?

That isn’t what you said though now is it.

I'm not going through 156 pages to crop out the massive amount of negativity. Those who know, know.

of course you won’t.