[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Jacob]

Fair

It's more a moan at media reporting things on social media - which I get is cheap but I think almost always far less important than anything else they could be covering with that resource (and the reporting itself elevates the importance and we're in a vicious cycle). It slightly infuriates me and I lash out

Also fair

[crazy canuck]

Look, it's a story that confirms my bias that our hard-core convoy / anti-vax / anti-Trudeau activists are Russian stooges. Therefore I share it. It's not that they're a massive threat because Canadians support them in numbers. It's that they should continuously be discredited for being the anti-democratic tools of a hostile foreign power.

They are not Russian stooges.  They are a lower life form than even that.  They are MAGA copy cats.

Yeah, I guess to be a stooge you need to know where your orders are coming from. These guys are N steps removed from the people who are using them.

 

[viper37]

Damn liberals, this is somehow their fault.

Even I would hesitate to blame them for this. 

But now that you mention it...

[viper37]

Look, it's a story that confirms my bias [...]Therefore I share it.

hmm...
Isn't this like, exactly the same thing we blame the populist right for doing?

[viper37]

Look, it's a story that confirms my bias that our hard-core convoy / anti-vax / anti-Trudeau activists are Russian stooges. Therefore I share it. It's not that they're a massive threat because Canadians support them in numbers. It's that they should continuously be discredited for being the anti-democratic tools of a hostile foreign power.

Fair

It's more a moan at media reporting things on social media - which I get is cheap but I think almost always far less important than anything else they could be covering with that resource (and the reporting itself elevates the importance and we're in a vicious cycle). It slightly infuriates me and I lash out

The problem is if their online comments are not referred to people like Viper argue they are not all that bad.

I said the protest had nothing to do with fascism or sedition and was much less violent than your typical left wing protest.

That someone brought a Confederate flag is as insignificant to me as Chrystia Freeland parading with the huge banner of a neo nazi Ukrainian movement.  I don't believe for one second she's a nazi.  I don't know about her Ukrainian grandfather, but I don't think it matters to who she is.

The kind of story reported here by you guys is the same kind as those reported on Freeland and her (supposed) nazi links: not based on factual evidence.

Now, if you want to tell me that the biggest construction union of Quebec, part of the biggest union in Quebec, the one who's behind the creation of Québec Solidaire, the one who regularly provides manpower for socialist parties during election times, the union that help the students finance their strikes during the "Student spring" is a fascist organization, I'll be very pleased to hear about it

[crazy canuck]

One of the Conservative Party of Canada's sitting members of parliament presented a petition to the House of Commons that calls on the Government of Canada to ban COVID-19 vaccines for any Canadian who is capable of spawning children.

Niagara West Conservative MP Dean Allison, who previously sponsored other petitions relating to vaccines, gave his blessings to a petition that demands the federal government immediately "suspend the use of COVID-19 vaccines" for all "pregnant women, children, youth, and adults of child-bearing age."

On March 2, Allison presented the House of Commons with a petition he sponsored calling for a ban on mRNA vaccines.

Allsion's petition falsely claims that "vaccine nanoparticles" from Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine are accumulating in people's "endocrine organs" and causing possible "infertility":

"We, the undersigned, Citizens of Canada, call upon the Government of Canada to suspend the use of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women, children, youth, and adults of child-bearing age."

Demonstration of the difficulty any leader of the Conservatives will have.  What to do with the anti science wing of the party while still keeping the rational people in the tent so it doesn't collapse.


https://pressprogress.ca/conservative-mp-presents-petition-to-ban-covid-19-vaccines-for-all-canadian-adults-of-child-bearing-age/

[crazy canuck]

The Conservative slide to Trumpism.

A poll by Leger taken between March 4 and 6 asked the hypothetical question: If you could vote in the next U.S. presidential election, would you vote for President Joe Biden or Mr. Trump? Among people who identified as supporters of the federal Conservative Party of Canada, 56 per cent said Mr. Biden, but an astounding 44 per cent said Mr. Trump.

This, despite Mr. Trump's admiration for dictators, his penchant for lying, his applause for Mr. Putin's foray into Ukraine and his complicity in the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, among other things.

Which brings us to the Conservative party's current leadership race.

It is pretty clear that the party is as divided as ever. It's equally evident where the main combatants intend to fish for votes: Pierre Poilievre is casting his line in waters occupied by the more right-wing elements of the party, in many respects the CPC's base, while former federal Progressive Conservative Party leader Jean Charest and Brampton, Ont., Mayor Patrick Brown intend to look for votes among moderates. (Yes, there are others in the race but unless another big name enters the fray, these are the three we will most likely be talking about until the vote on Sept. 10).

Already, Mr. Poilievre and his campaign team have signalled they have come to play, with hard-hitting ads that attempt to define both Mr. Charest and Mr. Brown as policy flip-floppers who will betray the party grassroots. It's a charge that detractors of Erin O'Toole used effectively to undermine and ultimately end his leadership. It may be a deadly weapon for Mr. Poilievre as well.

Ultimately, it will come down to what type of person party supporters want as their flag-bearer: a centrist conservative such as Mr. Charest or Mr. Brown? Or a slick, take-no-prisoners, loose-with-the-facts populist like Mr. Poilievre, who will move the party to the ideological right?

Make no mistake: Mr. Poilievre is going after those CPC supporters who would pick a Trump ticket over a Biden one. If you're looking for them, many can be found at any of these pop-up "freedom" rallies you see across the country. They were the ones flying Trump flags at the trucker convoy that squatted in the city of Ottawa for three weeks before being forced out. It's why Mr. Poilievre reached out to them to offer his encouragement and support at the time, despite the havoc and hardship they were causing to residents of the capital.

A large percentage of these folks can be found in Alberta and Saskatchewan, two provinces Mr. Poilievre hopes to own come the convention. He likely will. His angry, divisive style of politics sells well on the Prairies, where hatred for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau runs high. Mr. Poilievre is happy to stoke and foment that dissent even if it entails propagating ridiculous conspiracy theories – another page he's ripped out of the Trump playbook.

Mr. Poilievre's latest is spreading spurious claims about the World Economic Forum (which Mr. Trudeau and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland have attended), characterizing it as a cabal of elites conjuring a world in which the little people own nothing and learn to be happy with it.

"Maybe that's why the [federal] government is inflating home prices," Mr. Poilievre suggests in a campaign video.

This is not only dishonest, it's also dangerous – these tactics are precisely why we see the rage that we do in many parts of the country.

Given the starkly different views that the two main camps in this race represent (Mr. Brown and/or Mr. Charest vs. Mr. Poilievre), it's difficult to say what the CPC will look like once the dust settles. Are the more mainstream, temperate party members going to be okay with someone like Mr. Poilievre, who seems increasingly comfortable resorting to the type of dishonest, coercive methods for which Republicans south of the border have become known?

From Mason's piece in the Globe today

[Oexmelin]

Mr. Poilievre's latest is spreading spurious claims about the World Economic Forum (which Mr. Trudeau and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland have attended), characterizing it as a cabal of elites conjuring a world in which the little people own nothing and learn to be happy with it.

How could anyone believe such a thing about famously democratic meeting as Davos, the celebrated forum of the downtrodden, is beyond me.

[Barrister]

How could anyone believe such a thing about famously democratic meeting as Davos, the celebrated forum of the downtrodden, is beyond me.

I know, right?

[crazy canuck]

Mr. Poilievre's latest is spreading spurious claims about the World Economic Forum (which Mr. Trudeau and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland have attended), characterizing it as a cabal of elites conjuring a world in which the little people own nothing and learn to be happy with it.

How could anyone believe such a thing about famously democratic meeting as Davos, the celebrated forum of the downtrodden, is beyond me.

You would make a good right wing apologist.  We already have one of those here.

[Oexmelin]

I think someone making that argument would have to make it in very bad faith, considering everything else I post about my politics. In fact, my politics align quite well with a very critical view of such places as Davos, which the left has denounced since basically forever. A rejection of much of what Poilièvre stands for shouldn't silence criticism for the sort undue proximity of political personel with the über-rich of the world, who buy themselves cheaply some good conscience by inviting a few activists they listen to, and promptly forget in between the hors d'oeuvres. The sort of political access the rich purchase for themselves at Davos is obscene, and should absolutely be denounced.

[crazy canuck]

I think someone making that argument would have to make it in very bad faith, considering everything else I post about my politics. In fact, my politics align quite well with a very critical view of such places as Davos, which the left has denounced since basically forever. A rejection of much of what Poilièvre stands for shouldn't silence criticism for the sort undue proximity of political personel with the über-rich of the world, who buy themselves cheaply some good conscience by inviting a few activists they listen to, and promptly forget in between the hors d'oeuvres. The sort of political access the rich purchase for themselves at Davos is obscene, and should absolutely be denounced.

Your one line quip lined up very well with Poilievre's Trumpist position.  Given the slide the Conservatives are on to Trumpism, you should take more care.

There is a lot to criticize about Davos, seeming to suggest that Poilievre's point has any merit is not one of them.  Be careful about giving grist to the mill for those who will support him.

You have often warned people here about what is happening in the US, but it is also happening here and you should not be so flippant about it.

[Sheilbh]

I think someone making that argument would have to make it in very bad faith, considering everything else I post about my politics. In fact, my politics align quite well with a very critical view of such places as Davos, which the left has denounced since basically forever. A rejection of much of what Poilièvre stands for shouldn't silence criticism for the sort undue proximity of political personel with the über-rich of the world, who buy themselves cheaply some good conscience by inviting a few activists they listen to, and promptly forget in between the hors d'oeuvres. The sort of political access the rich purchase for themselves at Davos is obscene, and should absolutely be denounced.

Yes. It's a common thing - I don't buy the populist right's take at all on almost anything because I'm 90% sure it's bad faith. I think their take on class is wrong and just being used for their own political purposes. And their solutions are not ones I'd support (e.g. they never involve what seems to me the easiest solution which is trying to re-balance political and economic power especially through unions and organised labour). And very often its bullshit in terms of policy to the extent there is any.

That doesn't mean the left should just abandon their standard criticism of basically the world Davos represents just because someone you otherwise disagree with echoes it or dim that criticism because someone bad might use it. Davos was a problem when it was (like the photo doing the rounds in the UK) Geldof, Blair, Bono and Putin doing a photocall. And when we're aware of oligarchs - Davos is part of that - it's a great spot for reputation laundering. If you look back at the sponsors of the WEF's "philanthropy" events you'll see a big chunk of them are now under sanctions. Where we are now is the world it created.

[Jacob]

Davos is all those things you say, Oex.

Poilievre's take is blindingly hypocritical and anything he would do to replace it would throw out whatever is even marginally positive about it in favour of things that are much more actively harmful.

[Grey Fox]

The reasons we hate Davos are not the reasons why Dollarama Angry Milhouse hates it.

He hates who is going there, not what is happening once there.