CanPol Megathread: Big Changus

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > CanPol Megathread: Big Changus

Angry Diplomat: Nov 7, 2009; Winner of the TSR Memorial Award for Excellence In Grogging

Yes your honor, we did in fact take his sister on a starlight tour, and she did die in the wilderness as a result, but he still called me whitey before he punched me so I contend that this particular case of assaulting an officer constitutes a hate crime. This is a clear-cut case of racially motivated violence and this racist criminal needs to be taken off the streets.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 05:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 21:30

Whiskey Sours: Jan 25, 2014; Weather proof.

OSI bean dip posted:

Partially correct. "White" was really you passed with the correct skin colour and were of the appropriate religious faith or observed something that nobody cared about. Someone in the Middle East could pass for "white" just as much as someone in Brittany.

What part of "Eurasian" dominance are you overlooking then? Much of human history owes its successes to the early dominance of the fertile crescent (which is not European) and only the latter half of the second millennium CE did Europe show up to the game with any level of adequate force. If Japan hadn't entered into its period of isolationism for several centuries where all it did with the outside world was think that the Dutch were the poo poo and if China's leadership didn't prevent its near-industrialization in the 14th Century, what we have today would be radically different but it would have still been Eurasian dominance. The Sinosphere was only prevented growing further because of a lack of competition in China; unlike Europe where everyone was competing amongst themselves.

So yeah. Please tell me more about how Mongolians were the only people to commit atrocities in Eurasia and how Europe were really the only dominators.

Yes, if Japan and China hadn't entered periods of isolationism world history would have been quite different. But I don't think it's fair to blame Eurasians for the historical legacy of colonialism in Africa, when the perpetrators were primarily Europeans.

But the primary issue is that these posts of yours seem to imply that you don't know that European and Eurasian aren't synonyms.

OSI bean dip posted:

But please. Tell us how "European" and "Eurasian" are two different things because I am sure you can enlighten us all.

OSI bean dip posted:

White people tend to forget that the vast majority of problems today exist because of their European heritage. Almost all of the world's current strife is the result of Eurasian dominance since the dawn of civilization.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 05:34

Legit Businessman: Sep 2, 2007

Legit Businessman fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Sep 9, 2022

# ? Jul 6, 2016 05:35

HackensackBackpack: Aug 20, 2007; Who needs a house out in Hackensack? Is that all you get for your money?

Furnaceface posted:

Gas this loving thread already.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 05:37

Fluffy Chainsaw: Jul 6, 2016; I'm likely a pissant middle manager who pisses off IT with worthless requests. There is no content within my posts other than a garbage act akin to a know-it-all, which likely is how I behave in real life. It's really hard for me to comprehend how much I am hated by everyone.

In the time that has elapsed since you all moved on from talking about pipelines, China has emitted more GHG than the oil sands emitted in the entirety of 2015.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 05:38

T.C.: Feb 10, 2004; Believe.

http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abpc/doc/2016/2016abpc151/2016abpc151.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAQVGFtYXJhIENyb3djaGllZgAAAAAB&resultIndex=1

quote:

A. Was This a �Hate Motivated� Crime?

[9] The Crown referred to a number of cases in support of its position that this crime attracts the statutory aggravating factor under s. 718.2(a)(i): �evidence that the offence was motivated by hate based on race or colour.�

[10] In R. v. Ingram, (1977) 35 CCC (2d) 376, the Ontario Court of Appeal said:

It is a fundamental principle of our society that every member must respect the dignity, privacy and person of the other. Crimes of violence increase when respect for the rights of others decreases, and, in that manner, assaults such as occurred in this case attack the very fabric of our society. (para. 8)

[11] No one questions that finding. However, Ingram involved a prolonged verbal and then physical exchange between the offender and the victim on the Toronto transit system prior to an assault occurring in which the white offender continually commented on the victim�s skin colour and ethnicity. The Court disagreed with the trial judge�s finding that, based on the principle that all people are equally human, the racist commentary accompanying the assault was not an aggravating sentencing factor.

[12] Similar to Ingram, the other cases referred to by the Crown involve prolonged and specific racist commentary and targeting of victims. In R. v. Simms, 1990 ABCA 352 (CanLII), 60 C.C.C. (3d) 499 (Alta. C.A.), the accused acted on his neo-nazi philosophy and targeted his victim for the victim�s supposedly pro-Semitic views. The assault was preceded by threatening phone calls. The accused wore swastika patches during the assault. He yelled �Up with white power� while running from the scene.

[13] In R. v. Van-Brunt, 2003 BCPC 559 (CanLII), the armed accused targeted a black person unknown to them. Both before and during the assault, they used a number of racial slurs; there was little else said in the course of a one minute long assault with weapons.

[14] In R. v. Vrdoljak, 2002 CarswellOnt 1005, the accused and two others were verbally abusing an elderly woman on a Toronto transit bus. The victim, who was black, intervened on her behalf. The accused beat him. They were tattooed with neo-nazi symbols and carrying documents espousing that philosophy. The trial judge found that �it was painfully obvious that all three accused shared the same racist ideology, and that it led them to associate with each other and caused them to participate in conduct that any decent person would have regarded as cowardly and disgraceful.� The assault was accompanied by a racial slur and the accused chanted �White power� on leaving the scene.

[15] These examples are readily distinguishable from this case. The offender said �I hate white people� and threw a punch. Her counsel argued that the offender was complaining about her socio-economic situation. Crown counsel called that �mere speculation.� I agree. But there is no evidence either way about what the offender meant or whether (as in the cited cases) she holds or promotes an ideology which would explain why this assault was aimed at this victim. What is clear is that the offender was one of a group of three indigenous persons, one of whom was apparently engaged in a friendly conversation with the victim�s friend. This, again, is unlike the situations in the cases referred to by the Crown.

[16] I am not satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that this offence was, even in part, motivated by racial bias.

Why do people get worked up about court cases without looking up what they actually say? Criminal decisions in Canada all get posted online I think, so if a news article lightly quotes a decision and then makes broad sweeping statements it's generally a good idea to look it up and figure out what actually happened.

The judge has a pretty good point. The comparable cases the crown used as examples were way more 'hate crime-y'. They were all people who had strong, provable, ties to a racist ideology or involved clear intimidation and fear. The one in paragraph 13 sounds comparable initially, but when you actually look at it you find that it involved a number of people intimidating a guy, yelling slurs at him and then attacking him. It has an intimidation level to it that this case didn't.

Basically, the judge decided that this seemed more like a drunk person getting angry at life and punching someone rather than the more clear cut case law that got quoted at him. It's not like the prosecution brought up similar cases perpetrated by white people and he decided that when a first nations person does the same thing it isn't a hate crime. He had case law quoted at him that was worse than the case at hand and decided that the standard of a hate crime is something better proven and more egregious than this case.

T.C. fucked around with this message at 05:46 on Jul 6, 2016

# ? Jul 6, 2016 05:42

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

Angry Diplomat posted:

Yes your honor, we did in fact take his sister on a starlight tour, and she did die in the wilderness as a result, but he still called me whitey before he punched me so I contend that this particular case of assaulting an officer constitutes a hate crime. This is a clear-cut case of racially motivated violence and this racist criminal needs to be taken off the streets.

You know, this would be a much better point if the victim weren't some random person who was completely unknown to the assailant and visa versa, and was not a police officer or anything.

But I guess she deserved to be assaulted because people with a similar skin tone did bad things. Victim-blaming: bad unless the victim is white.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 05:43

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

T.C. posted:

It's not like the prosecution brought up similar cases perpetrated by white people and he decided that when a first nations person does the same thing it isn't a hate crime. He had case law quoted at him that was worse than the case at hand and decided that the standard of a hate crime is something better proven and more egregious than this case.

Ironically, that probably has a lot to do with the privilege that white people enjoy!

If the situation were reversed, it should drat well be considered a hate crime. If the law doesn't consider it as such, I have to question why we even have a law concerning hate crimes on the books.

I see your point, but I think the bar for hate crime should maybe be a bit lower than "continuously chants bigoted things during commission of the crime," for everyone's sake.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 05:48

Lain Iwakura: Aug 5, 2004; The body exists only to verify one's own existence.; Taco Defender

Whiskey Sours posted:

Yes, if Japan and China hadn't entered periods of isolationism world history would have been quite different. But I don't think it's fair to blame Eurasians for the historical legacy of colonialism in Africa, when the perpetrators were primarily Europeans.

But the primary issue is that these posts of yours seem to imply that you don't know that European and Eurasian aren't synonyms.

Colonialism in Africa in a modern sense was perpetuated by the Europeans--yes. However, to say that Africa wasn't going to be colonized by others demonstrates a lack of knowledge about human migration as the "original" population within Madagascar came from Borneo, not mainland Africa. We can talk about the Bantu or how North Africa likely would have influenced the the rest of the continent if it weren't for the Sahara for all we want too but that isn't what we're talking about here.

Eurasia as a concept extends from Keflavik in western Iceland all the way east to the Bering Strait. I am not sure why you insist on trying to differentiate between European and Eurasian except maybe a closeted attempt to demonstrate European supremacy over the rest of Eurasia or some nonsense like that.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 05:55

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

Who would have guessed that, given various separate populations from the largest landmass on Earth, there's a better than average chance of any single one being particularly powerful from time to time when compared with other landmasses?

Why, I think it's racism, it is!

:rolleyes:

# ? Jul 6, 2016 05:58

Lain Iwakura: Aug 5, 2004; The body exists only to verify one's own existence.; Taco Defender

PT6A posted:

Who would have guessed that, given various separate populations from the largest landmass on Earth, there's a better than average chance of any single one being particularly powerful from time to time when compared with other landmasses?

Why, I think it's racism, it is!

Eurasia was always poised to be successful because it had good combination a dominate east-west geography and agriculture that was conductive to human progress.

Everyone else who migrated away or stayed put in Africa were at a disadvantage due to a lack of resources. It wasn't that the Europeans were racist, it was the fact that they managed to get their poo poo together first and thus became the dominate force in the second millennium CE. It was the false logic by Europeans that since they were able to get their act together that everyone else was primitive and thus should be used no differently than the animals they used on their farms back home. This is of course very much incorrect, but if it were China or Japan that had gotten around to all this first, we'd be talking about how they hosed up the world, not the Europeans.

Racism didn't take over the world; it was whoever figured out organization that was better. Racism was just an unfortunate side-effect of being the victors because it let idiots make atrocious decisions.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 06:05

Homeroom Fingering: Apr 25, 2009; The secret history (((they))) don't want you to know

Time to update the old ignore list.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 06:10

Baronjutter: Dec 31, 2007; "Tiny Trains"

tetsul posted:

Time to update the old ignore list.

So long as it's not racially motivated, this is your right.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 06:12

Whiskey Sours: Jan 25, 2014; Weather proof.

OSI bean dip posted:

I am not sure why you insist on trying to differentiate between European and Eurasian

You started this conversation by talking about white people, and now you're implicitly blaming Nepal and Uzbekistan for colonialism.

OSI bean dip posted:

White people tend to forget that the vast majority of problems today exist because of their European heritage. Almost all of the world's current strife is the result of Eurasian dominance since the dawn of civilization.

You start by blaming white people, then Europeans, then Eurasians in the same paragraph. Then criticize people for pointing out the distinction between Europe and Eurasia when it comes to colonialism.

For the record, I also don't think it's fair to blame the Irish or the Sami for colonialism just because they live on the same continent as the Belgians.

At least if you're blaming white people, you're including the racialist ideologies that contributed to colonialism.

Lumping Belgians and the English in with the rest of Eurasia (when many of those countries and nationalities also suffered at the hands of European empires) is just weird.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 06:12

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

OSI bean dip posted:

Eurasia was always poised to be successful because it had good combination a dominate east-west geography and agriculture that was conductive to human progress.

Everyone else who migrated away or stayed put in Africa were at a disadvantage due to a lack of resources. It wasn't that the Europeans were racist, it was the fact that they managed to get their poo poo together first and thus became the dominate force in the second millennium CE. It was the false logic by Europeans that since they were able to get their act together that everyone else was primitive and thus should be used no differently than the animals they used on their farms back home. This is of course very much incorrect, but if it were China or Japan that had gotten around to all this first, we'd be talking about how they hosed up the world, not the Europeans.

Racism didn't take over the world; it was whoever figured out organization that was better. Racism was just an unfortunate side-effect of being the victors because it let idiots make atrocious decisions.

I think this is a fascinating discussion, and I honestly would like to hear more about your theories as to why Eurasia was so dominant (I'm not sure, for example, what you mean by Eurasia having agriculture that was conducive to human progress, but I'd like to hear more about it). That being said, I think it has essentially nothing to do with the current discussion, which is about a racially-motivated attack on a white-identified person.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 06:15

Lain Iwakura: Aug 5, 2004; The body exists only to verify one's own existence.; Taco Defender

Whiskey Sours posted:

You started this conversation by talking about white people, and now you're implicitly blaming Nepal and Uzbekistan for colonialism.

You start by blaming white people, then Europeans, then Eurasians in the same paragraph. Then criticize people for pointing out the distinction between Europe and Eurasia when it comes to colonialism.

For the record, I also don't think it's fair to blame the Irish or the Sami for colonialism just because they live on the same continent as the Belgians.

At least if you're blaming white people, you're including the racialist ideologies that contributed to colonialism.

Lumping Belgians and the English in with the rest of Eurasia (when many of those countries and nationalities also suffered at the hands of European empires) is just weird.

I didn't lump in Nepal or Uzbekistan as in the latter's case it was settled by Iranians pre-CE and later Uygers--Nepal as a state did not exist until the 1700s. I very much made reference to the Sinosphere which is dominated by Japan and China. My point was that the Sinosphere was in competition with Europe for dominance over south-east Asia and that Eurasia as a whole was always going to win out on the hegemony race.

Dominance over parts of Eurasia by other Eurasian groups has been commonplace throughout recorded history--see the English dominating the Irish or a more modern case where the Russians are dominating the Caucasus or Ukraine. There is no lumping in here but someone somewhere in Eurasia was destined to be the victor and the reasons for why are many.

PT6A posted:

I think this is a fascinating discussion, and I honestly would like to hear more about your theories as to why Eurasia was so dominant (I'm not sure, for example, what you mean by Eurasia having agriculture that was conducive to human progress, but I'd like to hear more about it). That being said, I think it has essentially nothing to do with the current discussion, which is about a racially-motivated attack on a white-identified person.

It would be a fun topic but we're off-topic for this thread.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 06:29

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

OSI bean dip posted:

It would be a fun topic but we're off-topic for this thread.

Indeed it is. I've always been fascinated by how geography influences culture, and then by way of culture, influences essentially all of human history -- and the seemingly inconsequential factors that can turn out to have a huge effect.

If you would ever like to make a thread on the subject, I'd love to read it, and I promise I'll try not to be as much of a knob as I am in this one.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 06:36

Legit Businessman: Sep 2, 2007

Legit Businessman fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Sep 9, 2022

# ? Jul 6, 2016 06:38

DariusLikewise: Oct 4, 2008; You wore that on Halloween?

I am white but I also hate all whites, I am a self-hating white. Come get me for my race crimes assholes.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 06:39

BattleMaster: Aug 14, 2000

Eurasia according to Wikipedia is essentially everything in the world except Greenland, Africa, The Americas, and Australia, and has some 5 billion people in it so I'm not sure how useful it really is to consider it one entity.

edit: but when you put it that way, I guess it's pretty obvious that 70% of the world's population would be a dominant force

BattleMaster fucked around with this message at 07:58 on Jul 6, 2016

# ? Jul 6, 2016 07:54

RBC: Nov 23, 2007; IM STILL SPENDING MONEY FROM 1888

glad this thread has turned into hitler chat and stormfront lite. good job

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Jul 6, 2016 11:40

Der Waffle Mous: Nov 27, 2009; In the grim future, there is only commerce.

I blame the Huns, personally.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 12:23

tagesschau: Sep 1, 2006; D&D: HASBARA SQUAD
THE SPEECH SUPPRESSOR

Remember: it's "antisemitic" to protest genocide as long as the targets are brown.

T.C. posted:

http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abpc/doc/2016/2016abpc151/2016abpc151.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAQVGFtYXJhIENyb3djaGllZgAAAAAB&resultIndex=1

Why do people get worked up about court cases without looking up what they actually say? Criminal decisions in Canada all get posted online I think, so if a news article lightly quotes a decision and then makes broad sweeping statements it's generally a good idea to look it up and figure out what actually happened.

The judge has a pretty good point. The comparable cases the crown used as examples were way more 'hate crime-y'. They were all people who had strong, provable, ties to a racist ideology or involved clear intimidation and fear. The one in paragraph 13 sounds comparable initially, but when you actually look at it you find that it involved a number of people intimidating a guy, yelling slurs at him and then attacking him. It has an intimidation level to it that this case didn't.

Section 718.2(a) has no requirement that the perpetrator have strong, provable ties to a racist ideology for it to be deemed a hate crime, only "evidence that the offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race..." A trial court does not get to arbitrarily insert a standard other than the one passed by Parliament.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 13:16

Reince Penis: Nov 15, 2007; by R. Guyovich

tagesschau posted:

Section 718.2(a) has no requirement that the perpetrator have strong, provable ties to a racist ideology for it to be deemed a hate crime, only "evidence that the offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race..." A trial court does not get to arbitrarily insert a standard other than the one passed by Parliament.

Jurisprudence isn't arbitrary????

E: Deciders use standards based in jurisprudence everyday. It is a cornerstone of our legal tradition.

Reince Penis fucked around with this message at 13:49 on Jul 6, 2016

# ? Jul 6, 2016 13:45

unlimited shrimp: Aug 30, 2008

I think we can all agree that the litmus test for a hate crime isn't the broken thinking animating the action, but rather the relative placement of the assailed to the assailant on the oppression ladder.

e.

tetsul posted:

Time to update the old ignore list.

Shameful.

unlimited shrimp fucked around with this message at 14:20 on Jul 6, 2016

# ? Jul 6, 2016 14:12

Vintersorg: Mar 3, 2004; President of
the Brendan Fraser
Fan Club

The internets self-hatred has manifested in this "all white people are loving trash".

# ? Jul 6, 2016 14:53

Fried Watermelon: Dec 29, 2008

Just because I punch someone who happens to be white while saying I hate white people doesn't make it a hate crime.

It's like saying I hate the rain while punching a white person, it's just a statement of a personal preference.

Who doesn't hate white people?

# ? Jul 6, 2016 15:14

Albino Squirrel: Apr 25, 2003; Miosis more like meiosis

PT6A posted:

Indeed it is. I've always been fascinated by how geography influences culture, and then by way of culture, influences essentially all of human history -- and the seemingly inconsequential factors that can turn out to have a huge effect.

If you would ever like to make a thread on the subject, I'd love to read it, and I promise I'll try not to be as much of a knob as I am in this one.

OSI's argument is basically the thesis to Guns, Germs, and Steel, which although it's been criticized remains an excellent read.

Baaaack to politics, Jason Kenney is apparently really running for PC leader in Alberta. Doesn't solve the main problem the right has in AB, which is that both the PCs and Wild Rose agree it needs to be united but both insist it be under their own banner.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 15:26

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

Albino Squirrel posted:

Baaaack to politics, Jason Kenney is apparently really running for PC leader in Alberta. Doesn't solve the main problem the right has in AB, which is that both the PCs and Wild Rose agree it needs to be united but both insist it be under their own banner.

Why Kenney, though? He's another god-bothering gently caress who embodies all the things I dislike about big-C Conservatives in Canada, instead of being the sort of person I'd actually consider voting for.

Have we ever considered that maybe the right-wing in Alberta is just sick of holding power for so long and actually doesn't want to do it any more? Libertarianism, for better or worse, would catch like absolute wildfire here, and it would actually occupy a space on the political spectrum that's currently not represented, and yet no one seems willing to give it a try.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 15:35

Legit Businessman: Sep 2, 2007

Legit Businessman fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Sep 9, 2022

# ? Jul 6, 2016 15:37

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

The Wildrose Party would seem to prove that mere dumbness is no significant impediment to becoming a force in Alberta politics. In all likelihood, the problem with libertarian parties have more to do with lack of organization and funds than anything else. If the PCs made an attempt to move the party in that direction, by de-emphasizing all their socially conservative nonsense and doubling down on fiscal responsibility, I think they'd probably do quite well.

I'm not saying that would be a good thing, necessarily. Just that I think it would be successful.

Somebody fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Sep 9, 2022

# ? Jul 6, 2016 15:41

Postess with the Mostest: Apr 4, 2007; Arabian nights
'neath Arabian moons
A fool off his guard
could fall and fall hard
out there on the dunes

PT6A posted:

If the PCs made an attempt to move the party in that direction, by de-emphasizing all their socially conservative nonsense and doubling down on fiscal responsibility

But then they'd just be the NDP?

# ? Jul 6, 2016 15:42

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

Ikantski posted:

But then they'd just be the NDP?

Not in Alberta they certainly wouldn't be. The NDP here have been incredibly free-spending, even as the federal party is putting more emphasis on fiscal responsibility.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 15:48

Angry Diplomat: Nov 7, 2009; Winner of the TSR Memorial Award for Excellence In Grogging

PT6A posted:

If the PCs made an attempt to move the party in that direction, by de-emphasizing all their socially conservative nonsense and doubling down on fiscal responsibility, I think they'd probably do quite well.

A lot of people have been saying this about the Conservatives at every level for years, and they've been right for years. I have to wonder how Harper's reign would have gone if he hadn't behaved like such a psycho when it came to social issues, the missing & murdered indigenous women inquiry (holy gently caress he hamfisted that), and the like. If he'd been canny (and, uh, not-fundamentalist-turbochristian) enough to maintain a low to moderate level of divisive xenophobia while superficially maintaining a relatively progressive image on certain hot-button issues, I can't help thinking that he might still be in power today thanks to the lack of any real competition on the right. I mean, what the hell are disgruntled social conservatives going to do? Vote Liberal?

In any case, I'm quite sure the Conservative brand is now pretty solidly associated with regressive (or at best stagnant) social policies in the minds of a fair percentage of voters. It's almost like their reluctance to change with the times has led people to believe that they're unlikely to change with the times. Then again, LGBTory marches are a thing that exist, so who the gently caress even knows anymore.

Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Jul 6, 2016

# ? Jul 6, 2016 15:53

DariusLikewise: Oct 4, 2008; You wore that on Halloween?

Angry Diplomat posted:

A lot of people have been saying this about the Conservatives at every level for years, and they've been right for years. I have to wonder how Harper's reign would have gone if he hadn't behaved like such a psycho when it came to social issues, the missing & murdered indigenous women inquiry (holy gently caress he hamfisted that), and the like. If he'd been canny (and, uh, not-fundamentalist-turbochristian) enough to maintain a low to moderate level of divisive xenophobia while superficially maintaining a relatively progressive image on certain hot-button issues, I can't help thinking that he might still be in power today thanks to the lack of any real competition on the right. I mean, what the hell are disgruntled social conservatives going to do? Vote Liberal?

In any case, I'm quite sure the Conservative brand is now pretty solidly associated with regressive (or at best stagnant) social policies in the minds of a fair percentage of voters. It's almost like their reluctance to change with the times has led people to believe that they're unlikely to change with the times. Then again, LGBTory marches are a thing that exist, so who the gently caress even knows anymore.

I'd like to think he lost because he basically tanked the economy by gambling everything on oil and losing, but it's probably mostly because of the C-51(WHICH STILL HASN'T BEEN CHANGED TRUDEAU) and C-24 backlash, combined with the fact he couldn't shut up about hijabs even after the Supreme Court told him to gently caress off.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 16:13

Lain Iwakura: Aug 5, 2004; The body exists only to verify one's own existence.; Taco Defender

Albino Squirrel posted:

OSI's argument is basically the thesis to Guns, Germs, and Steel, which although it's been criticized remains an excellent read.

That's one book to read but I would suggest reading on agricultural history since that is really the main reason why societies flourish.

DariusLikewise posted:

I'd like to think he lost because he basically tanked the economy by gambling everything on oil and losing, but it's probably mostly because of the C-51(WHICH STILL HASN'T BEEN CHANGED TRUDEAU) and C-24 backlash, combined with the fact he couldn't shut up about hijabs even after the Supreme Court told him to gently caress off.

Harper also lost due to Mike Duffy and the federal Liberals finally getting their act together on being the natural governing party once again.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 16:30

Fluffy Chainsaw: Jul 6, 2016; I'm likely a pissant middle manager who pisses off IT with worthless requests. There is no content within my posts other than a garbage act akin to a know-it-all, which likely is how I behave in real life. It's really hard for me to comprehend how much I am hated by everyone.

The CPC lost because the war-room changed focus from the LPC to the NDP early in the campaign and because the LPC had the most sympathetic line on Syrian refugees after the death of Alan Kurdi.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 16:43

Sovy Kurosei: Oct 9, 2012

PT6A posted:

Not in Alberta they certainly wouldn't be. The NDP here have been incredibly free-spending, even as the federal party is putting more emphasis on fiscal responsibility.

The PCAA is more than just the Ralph Klein years. They had huge deficits in the 80s and early 90s.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 17:10

Do it ironically: Jul 13, 2010; by Pragmatica

the trump tutelage posted:

Shameful.

I didn't even know people used the ignore list aha, why even go on the internet?

Still think it was a hate crime and the judge was being intentionally obtuse

# ? Jul 6, 2016 17:15

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 21:30

Fluffy Chainsaw: Jul 6, 2016; I'm likely a pissant middle manager who pisses off IT with worthless requests. There is no content within my posts other than a garbage act akin to a know-it-all, which likely is how I behave in real life. It's really hard for me to comprehend how much I am hated by everyone.

A Minister posted:

back to drawing board on fighter jets, launching consultations

OTTAWA � The Liberal government is launching yet another round of consultations with industry to find a new fighter jet for Canada.

Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan announced the approach on Wednesday, as he told industry representatives that only about half of Canada's existing CF-18 fighter jets are capable of flying at any given time.

Sajjan says the government will sit down with fighter jet companies to determine what their aircraft will cost, what economic benefits they can offer Canada and how fast they can deliver.

The minister emphasized the need for speed, warning that Canada can't currently meet its commitments to both NATO and North American defence.

The previous Conservative government launched a similar round of consultations with industry several years ago, when it pushed pause on plans to buy the F-35 stealth fighter.

The results of those consultations, which included a review by an independent panel of experts, were largely favourable to the F-35 � which the Liberals promised during the last election they wouldn't buy.

The Canadian Press

http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2016/07/06/defence-minister-insists-jets-must-be-replaced-soon-but-cant-give-timeline-2/#.V30vC7grKbh

What are the odds that the CF18 is replaced before the airframe turns 50?

# ? Jul 6, 2016 17:19

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > CanPol Megathread: Big Changus

«‹›2341 »