[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[viper37]

Oh come on with the bullying bullshit. Boo-fucking-hoo. No one was knifed or even hit in the face, as far as I know.

Do we need to wait for that to intervene?

Besides, intimidation is part of EVERY social conflict.

Wich is why it must stop.  Otherwise, please, lets stop prosecuting organized crime, racketting is a legitimate business practice, I suppose.

What do you think the police is doing with its SWAT-attire and its lacrymogenic gaz? Planting flowers? What you sanction is that the only groups who can bully around people they oppose are the police and the government. Bet that these green-square students would love to bully their opponents aside to pass and have their courses, like the scrawny little scabs that they are.

the police did not throw billard balls at people.  Nor did they throw bricks or asphalt piece.

If the left can not protest peacefully, than they should all be jailed.  The right wing movements can organize protest wich do not degenerate, and the left itself even had a few event where they specifically asked or no trouble beforehand and it worked.  It's not my problem if they are unwilling to condemn the violence of their member.  If violence is the only language the left understand, it's about time we change that.

I'm in Montreal. I was forced to search a taxi for an hour because the subway got smoked, and I have had an illegal manifestation two streets away from my home. It's not your city, it's far, far, far away from you in Quebec City, you might feel differently if you were in the middle of it. And yet, I don't consider it violence, at worst a nuisance, like a turd fly flying around my nose. No one has threaten to bomb the National Assembly or gun down the police.

I'm travelling there frequently.  Have to cross the island.  And besides, I'm paying for the damages too.  Don't think Montreal is going to foot the bill alone.  They'll keep whining until the government pays, like always.

Totally two different things, and your comparison with rape is not only ludicrous, but twisted. I won't legitimize this logical fallacy with a counter-argument.

it is an apt comparison.  You blame the victime rather than the agressor.

The deal that the government presented was not what it was agreed orally during the negociation, and so the deal was signed when one of the parties was in bad faith.

Bullshit.  The union representative, Réjean Parent, said so himself that the signed deal was the same thing that was discssused.  It's the student leader who feared the reaction of their troops and refused to accept it after having signed it.
Proof?  The FECQ was ready to sign basically the same deal last Thursday...  One week ago, not acceptable, now it's ok?

You are naive in believing the extreme left.  They are worhtless morons unable to read a piece of paper they sign.  The only thing they are good at is thrashing the place and beating people.

The problem is the student on strike won't settle for something trivial like a reduction of their tuition fees.  They want the government out, and they believe they can do it from the street.  Wich I happen to disagree with, even though I have no love for the Libs.

The government got caught with its pants down because Line Beauchamp stupidly went to yap in public, immediately after the deal was signed, to announce that the hike was integrally kept AND there was no assurance that the ever increasing student fees fixed by universities and their spendings would be seriously inquired upon and decreased to ease the financial burden of students, when the proposal hadn't be approved by the student bodies yet.

The government is just as stupid as the students.  Satisfied?
The deal was a decent deal for the students, not perfect, but decent.  All they gained, they could have had on day 1, had they chosen to sit with the government rather than go on strike and vandalize everything.

I disagree that, in a democracy, one needs to take the street and destroy everything.

This government has now a reputation of being willing to con and hoodwink its way into a political victory, and now they have gone back to a hardline positioning even though the student organizations repeatedly presented offers that could at least be countermanded in negociations. May 68 started in France with much less.

Everything we know about the Libs & Jean Charest, we knew before electing him.  People preferred the corrupt & experienced Liberals to the honest & uncorrupt ADQ.  Deal with it, just as I do.

Destroyed classrooms should be treated as defacement of property, not tantamount to terrorism. These are individual criminal acts and they should be prosecuted as such, but no one has brought proof that these were commanded by a higher hierarchy, CLASSE or another. If it were the case the heads of these organization could be prosecuted as incitators to commit criminal acts.

Those responsible for that were not accused of terrorism.  Those who threw smoke bombs in the metro were accused of immitating terrorism.  Wich is what it was.

But don't worry, it's not like we really enforce our laws and punish criminals.  At most, they'll spend 2-3 months in jail if they can't pay their fine.

In any conflict, there's intimidation and threats. Threatening to sue is intimidation. Protesting is intimidation. There's no end of the line. Those who commit criminal acts should be prosecuted, but it will always be a means to an end.

let's repeal our laws against organized crime.  Let's just prosecute those individuals who commit a crime.  It used to work great, didn't it?

Bullying suits you when it's on leftists. Your lenses are tainted. You treat the student strike as if it was an attempted coup d'État by a criminal organization.

Wich it almost is, according to your leftist pals.  I'm not the one talking about destroying everything, I'm not the one saying setting cars on fire is a good thing, these are your artist friends from Montreal.  And you are defending them.

What you want is the student strikers to shut up, return home, and go play XBOX.

Wich they do all day long anyway.  I want them to stop threatening people, let those who want to attend their classes go, stop trashing everything.  If it can't be done, they deserve jail.

Because even a street protest is, in fact, intimidation.

No, not really.  No more than a muscular man is a bully because of his size.

It's using numbers to prove a point and that things can degenerate if the government doesn't listen.

It's about using numbers to prove a point that voters have memory and the next election might not be so easy to win if they don't listen.

Well, the government not only doesn't listen and goes la-la-la, but in fact want to strap the child with a leather belt under the guise of "upholding the law". Who's bullying who, here?

The law is too far reaching, but I agree with the sentiment.  It's much better now than it was yesterday morning, thanks to a few amendments.
Still too far reaching.

Imho, all that was needed was to enforce the court orders, but the government seemed incapable of doing so.

When the law isn't applied

that's anachy.  End of the line.  Not tolerable in a democratic society.

Only a fool would expect that an order of the court would suffice and would be abided without angering the students to the point of uproar and wanting to punch these little fuckers in the face.

then the students are mere uncivilized savages who deserve nothing but contempt.

What you argue, is like arguing that scabs in a workplace conflict should be let to go to work because they want to work, that scabs should be able go fetch an order from the court to pass the picket line, and the strikers should take it with a smile. Guess what, scabs are illegal in Quebec for a good reason. Student strikers saw clear as day that respecting the order of the court would mean they would lose all power to impose their will, so from a political standpoint refusing to abide by it was justified, even though legally it is a crime.

1- I hate the anti-scab laws. It makes the union all powerful and leads to all the problem we have now.  Do I have to remind you who's behind the student strike, paying for everything?  Who pushed the students to sit down and sign the deal?
2- There is no right to strike for students.

Now you are being insultingly cheeky, mec. Accurso is a crook and shady businessman, his only motivation is using bribes and means to destroy competition to make more money. At least the student strikers have an defensible idea that they shouldn't be paying more money for studying, which is a fair revendication even though I disagree with it.

Accurso is a product of the FTQ, he was groomed by Louis Laberge and financed by Le Fond de Solidarité.  The same FTQ who is now financing the students.  Accurso's idea was that if you can't beat the system, join it.  The construction sector is dominated by the corrupt unions, so he joined them, and made a ton of money.

The student strikers have no defensible idea.  All they want is everything free.  They don't want to work during their studies, they don't want to work after their studies, all they want is to smoke pot at home and travel abroad.  Working is not slavery.  Working to pay your debts does  not kill anybody.  We ain't talking 100-200 000$ debt here, at most, 14 000$ in debt.  Most students are better of now than they were before the strike began (see Luc Godbout's analysis).

But taking a hard line doesn't mean that you cannot find ways to honey your way into alleviating the consequences in a palatable way for those who will be touched.

The students said so themselves: there is no end to the strike unless there is no increase in tuition fees.  How do you negociate with that?

That is showing leadership and compassion.

Something this government hasn't shown since 2003.  If the students weren't aware of that, they are dumb.

What I oppose is this govenment taking such a crass in-your-face and thuggish way to disrespect the students at every turn, like they were needed to be taught a lesson and never dare to protest again. It is exactly what real "bullying" is: using disbalance of power to abuse the weak by the strong for the sake of showing the pecking order.

They are still free to protest.  However, they can not forbid anyone willing so of studying.

We are in a state of social crisis now, whether we like it or not, and it has become almost a civil war-like atmosphere.

Tough choice.  On one side, commie rebels who want to overthrow the democratically elected government.  On the other side, a socialist government fond of status quo.  I'll stay on the lines and take on the winner, I think.

Quebec is now divided into two camps.

It does not have to be.

You cannot expect one side to play by the rules when it's clear the other part just want to fuck them in the arse and laugh in their faces.

Oh yeah.  Students are not richer than they were, despited having to pay more, but they are being fuck in the arse.  If that is being fucked in the arse, I understand why there are so many adept of this practice.

As an aside, I think that by now students should gladly go out of their way to be arrested en masse, to clog the system so much that prosecuting them all becomes unsustainable.

Please, do that.

On the contrary, it was a very smart move on their part. It ensures they will have the means AND the apparatus to support a long term conflict without being drained to death by fines and prison time, and they gain expertise to help them in any negociation with the government. It also threatens to broaden the conflict, when the union already have very good reasons to be as much of a pain to the govenment as possible. But of course, such a thing would be labeled "intimidation" by your broad definition of the word "bullying".

it ensure the unions would let them go once they no longer suited their needs and let them face the fight alone.

It's not a little minority of kids throwing a tamper tantrum, now.

It is.  It's at most 30% of the students who ware protesting.  If they threw as much energy in their studies and their work as they do for protests, they could sustain a much bigger hike.

Being backed by unions means that they are partnered with a group of organization labeled as "serious" heavyweights in Quebec politics. There is no middle-ground, now. It's way passed simple protest about tuition hikes.

being backed by unions means they have no problem with corruption and violence so long as it suits their needs.  Wich brings us back to the commie part...

And so is Charest and his cronies, because they have just ensured that anyone except the gullible, the weak, the obtuse, and the benefactors that will vote Liberal in the next election. If he is reelected it's gonna be 1970 all over again.

See, this morning, polls shows people are satisfied with the law.  Charest already won.  Because of the moronic student leaders, in particular GND.  Thank you all for giving Charest a 4th term. 

And now people who are against the Plan Nord, or that will protest against the obvious crooked links between the government, the lobbies, and construction entrepreneurs with dubious links with the mob won't be able to manifest freely either, until the next election.

The FTQ has links to the mob.  All those construction entrepreneurs you are hearing about have one thing in common: they all work hand in hand with the FTQ.  The same FTQ who supports the students.

And besides, everyone is still free to protest.  You just have to advise the police beforehand of your planned itinerary.

[viper37]

No place for real, classical Lib-Con voters like me.

Welcome to the club.  I have no political party anymore on either level of government.

[Zoupa]

Do the students deserve anything but contempt?

Not if they're breaking stuff.

Oh noes! They broke 3 bank windows in 3 months!! Whatever shall we do?????

[Admiral Yi]

Oh noes! They broke 3 bank windows in 3 months!! Whatever shall we do?????

Given in to their demands?

[Zoupa]

Their demands are to negotiate, so sure 

[Admiral Yi]

If I break three bank windows too, would I also get to negotiate?  Or would one or two still do the trick?

[Zoupa]

There's about 200-300 000 kids on strike. Very very minor physical damage to big institutions from a very very minor group does not disqualify the whole movement. Stop being dumb.

[viper37]

There's about 200-300 000 kids on strike. Very very minor physical damage to big institutions from a very very minor group does not disqualify the whole movement. Stop being dumb.

make it more like 20 - 30 000.
At most, there was 100 000 people for a peaceful protest in Montreal, in march, and this was including high school students.

[viper37]

There's about 200-300 000 kids on strike. Very very minor physical damage to big institutions from a very very minor group does not disqualify the whole movement. Stop being dumb.

Let's legalize organized crime   Not all members are violent, after all. 
Let's not vote harsh laws to regulate the construction industry, only a few entrepreneurs are criminals.

[Zoupa]

lolwut?

The march was 200 000 people, police confirmed.

As of today there are 166 068 students on strike. My bad.

[Zoupa]

There's about 200-300 000 kids on strike. Very very minor physical damage to big institutions from a very very minor group does not disqualify the whole movement. Stop being dumb.

Let's legalize organized crime   Not all members are violent, after all. 
Let's not vote harsh laws to regulate the construction industry, only a few entrepreneurs are criminals.

ok there buddy. Let's make any grouping of over 50 people illegal instead. Makes a whole lot of sense with the festivals coming. What happens when the crowds go home and decide to chant ''A qui la rue?'' on their way back? We lock up hundreds of thousands of people? 

[Admiral Yi]

There's about 200-300 000 kids on strike. Very very minor physical damage to big institutions from a very very minor group does not disqualify the whole movement. Stop being dumb.

No need to be rude, I'm just trying to understand the rules.

Now I got it: I need another 100,000 people before I get to break a window in a large institution.

[Zoupa]

I'm not being especially rude, I just don't feel like playing the cat and mouse Yi game.

If you're taking part in the Million Muttonchops Man on Washington DC, and a particular Muttonchop next to you overturns a portapotty, he's breaking the law. The other 999999 muttonchops shouldn't have to answer for the dumb one.

Get it?

[Admiral Yi]

I'm not being especially rude, I just don't feel like playing the cat and mouse Yi game.

If you're taking part in the Million Muttonchops Man on Washington DC, and a particular Muttonchop next to you overturns a portapotty, he's breaking the law. The other 999999 muttonchops shouldn't have to answer for the dumb one.

Get it?

I get it, and it's a reasonable line of argument, as far as it goes.  No collective responsibility, only individual.

The problem though with that line is the difficulty of apprehending the one evil Muttonchop in the middle of a million other Muttonchops. 

I assume the three evil window breaking students never got arrested?

[Zoupa]

Some did. Frankly, I don't care much. If the police can't do their job properly, it's not the student's fault.