Canada mulling ‘game plan’ if U.S. takes far-right, authoritarian shift.
Canada mulling ‘game plan’ if U.S. takes far-right, authoritarian shift.
OTTAWA - Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly says Canada has been considering a “game plan” for how it would respond if the United States takes a far-right, authoritarian shift after next year’s presidential elections.
You're viewing a single thread.
I've already checked. I've got enough qualifications that I can just migrate to Canada.
It'll be nice to teach them about what their summers are going to be like.
Canada is going to elect a conservative government, too
The whole world is shifting hard to the right. It's pretty crazy to see happen in real time.
Something something "weak men" something something "hard times"
Male fragility will kill us all.
Women buying into patriarchy doesn't make it any less of a phenomenon or any less dangerous.
Good thing that comment I replied to said "male fragility" and not "the patriarchy" or I'd probably agree with them.
You're a fool if you extrapolated that meaning from my words. The male fragility drives the culture of insecurity, greed, and competition. Women can be infected as well, but they are not the drivers of this psychosis.
Male fragility doesn't drive the culture of insecurity. It's an artificially introduced wedge tactic intended to keep the working class infighting.
Everyone with money and power are pretty happy with the status quo.
If you ever find yourself thinking that any regular working person is "the problem", step back and ask yourself who baited the trap. Some external narrative drew one of you in to make the other pissed off.
Like, they kept telling Cletus that the immigrants are why his paycheck is small, and that the big city liberals want to eradicate him. He says "Damn those immigrants" and then you come out of the woodwork telling him he's the problem with the country and then boom: you're suddenly the liberal who he's heard hates him, word made flesh, just as the prophecy foretold.
Like, how goddamn convenient that it's male fragility. How awesome for the 1% that out of everyone and everything, they hand you a loaded term like that that will CERTAINLY be taken out of context as a blanket condemnation of 50% of the population by anyone who doesn't study sociology (spoiler alert, MOST PEOPLE)
Like, if someone said to you that it was a result of a slowness of male development, and thus the Latin for "slow" was appropriate here, and that the accepted term that you should use in the world to try and initiate a thoughtful, respectful exchange of ideas in good faith, so you should say "male retardation", would you say "ya that sounds like a great way to talk to men and I can't comprehend any reason why anyone might be standoffish when hearing it"?
Again, you're a chump. You're brandishing a term INTENTIONALLY loaded to incite division among the working class. You are a useful idiot to the people oppressing you.
Everyone with money and power are pretty happy with the status quo.
Counterexample: Disney in Florida.
Fascism is not actually good for business. Fascism demands that the most successful business in the state must lick boots or be punished.
I agree that Disney is having a spat with specifically Ron DeSantis, and I think it does make them uncomfortable.
That being said, it's a very personal feud. DeSantis thought he could use them as a punching bag for some political points... and he was wrong. The actual law came down on Disney's side, no matter what DeSantis as an individual thought.
And this is why I'd still think that as a whole I personally would still say that Disney is still happy with the status quo.
The kinda icky reason why Disney knew the law would come down on their side is the same reason Mickey Mouse is still protected under copyright: Disney WRITES the law. They shovel money at politicians and LITERALLY write the bills they want them to pass.
So as uncomfortable as a spat with a man is, a system in which they can pay-to-legislate is still a status quo they're very happy with, and I don't think that was ever in jeapordy.
I will say that I was pleasantly surprised at what appeared to be a social conscience from Disney. I'm skeptical that it's strictly rooted in benevolence, but at this point even if the Ulta powerful do the right things (even if for maybe less-than-perfect reasons), I'm tired enough to just accept it as a W and move on.
Counterexample: Disney in Florida.
They gave 50k to a single-candidate super PAC called American Leadership Action which supported Dr Oz's candidacy last election cycle lol.
The last half century has basically been the US propping up fascist governments who will cater to private business interests of the US, like every coup they've sided with and helped fund in socialist countries that was basically the whole point.
Like, they kept telling Cletus that the immigrants are why his paycheck is small, and that the big city liberals want to eradicate him. He says “Damn those immigrants” and then you come out of the woodwork telling him he’s the problem with the country and then boom: you’re suddenly the liberal who he’s heard hates him, word made flesh, just as the prophecy foretold.
Exactly and the flipside of this is targeting the liberals and catering to the idea they can be morally superior, and building this meritocratic notion where the "Cletus" actually deserves to be poor and stupid. This mechanism basically removes individuals from the political economy and moralizes the outcomes caused by it as representative of their individual virtue. This idea of "virtue hoarding" has been used to describe this which I think can be pretty accurate. It can't solve anything either, and it's actually a very conservative approach to the topic at large because it doesn't acknowledge the economic material causes of why they're like this or try to solve the thing that causes these disparities. It makes it all about the individual and their moral choices. A lot of what's ignored from the people who liberals love to appropriate in their ideaology, like MLK Jr, is the radical notion of economic equality that made them so unpopular at the time, even among people who were morally opposed to racism. If you removed these prejduces from "Cletus," a lot of the city liberal types would still find him detestable as a person, and he would probably be asked to leave if he tried to enter one of their workplaces. Despite him having more materially in common with the liberal professional worker, the liberal likely believes themselves to have more in common with their bosses.
Exactly! And again, it's absolutely manufactured.
The anti-trans agenda is the most brilliantly executed wedge issue I've seen in a long time. Most "yokels" don't have any personal experience with trans people. They have no reason to hate them. Even if they're creeped out by what they don't understand, the numbers are so few that you couldn't under any stretch of the imagination convince them that they're a threat.
But the "foaming at the mouth big city liberals who hates anyone from outside the city" archetype? THAT looks like a threat. There are tons of city folk. They run the government. Do they really hate me?
You want to keep the working class infighting? Drop a trans issue into the mix. The country man says "Boy, now I tell you h'what, I'm not sure about that" and some genius will come out of the woodwork and say "FACIST!" and then boom, they have presented as the rabid threat. Sides are entrenched. Dialogue immediately erodes to ad hominem, both sides paint their strawmen, and they're convinced that it isn't a dispute over ideas but rather of the other side being intrinsically defective as people.
And in the squabble, education funding is cut. Class sizes grow. More money funneled to defence. Raytheon gets a contract to vaporize brown kids. CEO gets a 200 million bonus. The system works as intended.
It's way more likely someone knows a gay person than a trans person at this point so there's that unknown factor to exploit. It's also just more of a reality that your gender identity doesn't matter as much materially to the sort of path in life you're expected to take, and there's a lot of economic reasons for that. One being the cost of living and housing has already required two working adults in many places, another is industry specialization and professionalization. We also have a lot more identity technologies available to us, ways we can construct and inhabit identities and validate other people's identities. The funny thing is in many cases these virile straight male types are actually using the same gender ideology as the trans person, they're just as much discovering and finding out how to express their male-ness as the trans person is discovering how to best display the gender or non they prefer to be seen as. Even the adage "you aren't born a man, you become one" is basically the same notion Judith Butler presents under feminist theory. And of course the male identity stuff is commodified to shit just like anything else can be.
All the queer meme pages were making fun of Raytheon's DEI program this year so I think there's more awareness about this stuff in general now. I'm at a place where they've been putting in a top-down program like this and it's also the non-conforming people in the company asking the hard questions in the sessions to the diversity industry consultants which is great to see. I've also experienced the liberal "ally" condemnation in public once which was very uncomfortable, all because they heard a friend (who had transitioned) and I call each other "dude," which they were quick to point out very loudly to the entire party, "UH SHE'S A WOMAN!" Thankfully my friend loudly responded back "women can be dudes too" which shut her down, but I was just like girl get out of our business, and why are you listening to my friend and I greet each other, you don't know anything about our relationship. The worst thing is she was sober doing this lol.
Yeah this totally isn't a direct response to that weak fragility of man.
You wrote a book because you were triggered.
Because you're weak.
And scared.
You're right that I am afraid, but it's easy for me to articulate my fears without just calling other people names. And saying "triggered".
I'm afraid that the popularity of wedge issues manufactured to sow conflict within the working class is so effective. I'm afraid that good people (you) are being manipulated into participating enthusiastically in that manufactured conflict. I'm afraid that people like you, who have the capacity to channel their righteous anger have been conned into being upset against amorphous abstract boogeymen rather than the real concrete people responsible for real concrete injustice.
I'm not reading your scree.
I know.
Except you're ignoring the entire reality of male fragility in your attempt to shift the blame. The alpha males, the CEO billionaires, the dickhead fascists; they're all fragile males. (Like you.)
I'm not ignoring anything. Male fragility is absolutely a thing, and I'm telling you that it is intentionally manufactured.
Beyond that, I'm telling you that the vocabulary and channels of discourse around male fragility are ALSO manufactured in a way to make those discussions as least likely to be successful as possible.
How often does bringing up male fragility outside of your echo chambers result in positive outcomes? Never?
It's nurtured in foolish young males by insecure and fearful old males. It's still fragile, and it's still a male dominated phenomenon that is STILL going to kill us all, and you throwing a tantrum won't change anything.
Please explain to me in detail how a matriarchal social structure would solve this, with relevant historical examples to support your claims.
Also, "women are too dumb to think for themselves, they must be brainwashed" is one of the strangest supposedly left-wing takes I've seen on this site.
Please explain in detail how you arrived at the conclusion that I'm advocating for a matriarchal social structure. Hilarious that you're demanding historical examples when you know they were all murdered by fragile men like you.
Ah yes, let's red herring with gender politics and sexism.
Seriously, this isn't productive, it's toxic, and belongs back on Reddit and back on the gate communities there.
Lemmy "progressives" would rather argue about social politics than actually solve problems. It's one of the far-rights greatest strengths, left-wing groups fragment at the drop of a pencil over the slightest disagreements
They were never aligned to begin with
You're a gender-phobic furryhater that is failing to call out the racism of white male infants, keep lickin' those boots.
You got me on the furry hater. I can't deny that one, but please translate that word spaghetti for those of us in the audience without brain damage.
Permanently Deleted
It's due to all the propaganda BS everyone needs a fairness doctrine for media at this point
Which is hilarious because I look at PP and all I see is a weak man and yet that's what we will probably elect.
We won't elect PP. We will elect whoever isn't Mr.T.
PP isn't doing very well even for the conservatives but they will still vote for him and the swinger voters have already made up thier mind and switched to the CPC.
Why wouldn't you elect Mr. T? I would love to have BA Barakas leading my country
His main policy of "pity the fool" isn't great.
I think it's more "tech has created extremely reliable and granular methods to hijack a democracy". Pair that with wealth inequality, and you have a recipe for billionaires able to buy their way into becoming nobility without putting a target on their backs.
This wasn't some accident or an artifact - a small group of billionaires bought up the Western media over the last few decades, have run astroturfing operations to misrepresent public sentiment to lawmakers, and more recently have started to use social media to shape discourse. And I think we all know they do a whole lot more behind, but these are the things that are well documented publicly if you care to look
Humanity has plenty of cycles, but this was something done intentionally and systematically by a number of individuals that could fit in one room
Maybe if the leftwing was actually capable of doing something it would have some support.
The NDP got us national dental and doubled CERB payments, all while not even the opposition.
Also the NDP is the only party that wants to push public transit and better city design. Even if it isn't a federal mandate.
The liberals are also pushing for 15 minute city infrastructure.
The Liberals also pushed for election reform...
Which isn't a high priority.
They don't need to elect anything. Fascism is inherently militaristic.
If the US goes full fascist, then it's only a matter of time.
No place in the world will be safe.
Most places in the world were never safe from the US anyway, it has had aggressively competitive foreign policy for the last 80 years.
No argument there, but it can always get worse.
Meh, the USA won't invade Canada. Even if we go full fascist Canada is way better as a frenemy.
Our largest trading partner won't be able to give us a reason to invade.
Mexico on the other hand should watch out, given the amount of scapegoating our right wing throw their way.
Mexico is their largest trading partner now, just a heads up.
Yeah but the fascists are already talking about invading them. And like hey, last time we did it we got our most profitable state out of it
Facts have never had an effect on conservative feelings, despite one of their favorite sayings being “facts don’t care about your feelings”
Who's? Canada's or the USA? In both cases that's false.
The Canadian economy is inextricably linked to ours (USA). Any plans they have to deal with a racist USA has to take that, and the military disparity, into account. Canada is in a very shit situation if the USA falls to fascism. Appeasement is their only realistic option.
Canada is in a very shit situation if the USA falls to fascism. Appeasement is their only realistic option.
Ah, yes, the famous stopper of fascist expansion: Appeasement.
Canada has already been identified as a valid target for decades due to South Parks "blame Canada."
Our largest trading partner won't be able to give us a reason to invade.
Water and farmable land?
Poilievre isn't conservative. He's pretty much far right.
He supports Ukraine, climate change targets, new housing construction, abortion rights, immigration, legal weed, and gay marriage. He has plenty of other extremely problematic positions and I hope he loses badly, but nevertheless, the gap between him and basically any Republican is pretty substantial.
He’s voted against abortion rights, he’s voted against gay marriage, he’s lukewarm about legal weed but tbf prob wont illegalize it, and his solution to climate change is producing more oil.
Wikipedia:
In 2020, he changed his position and said that a government led by him would never introduce a bill on the topic, and no private ones would be adopted. In 2021, Poilievre opposed a private member bill prohibiting sex-selective abortion.
Poilievre supports same-sex marriage; in a 2020 interview, he called it a "success" and stated "I voted against it 15 years ago. But I learned a lot".
And yeah, he wants to produce more oil, but so does Biden. And for that matter, Trudeau also wants to build more oil pipelines. I wish there were more mainstream politicians who were genuinely anti-fossil-fuel but those are, unfortunately, few and far between.
- Wikipedia is not a reliable source
- They keep voting to infringe on that right as recently as this year https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/03/canada-abortion-rights-pregnancy
- Ya I don’t think that Pollievre would restrict access to gay marriage, but if he voted against it with his gay father in attendance, if that isn’t a sign of a piece of shit I don’t know what is. ( he also is courting the voters and MP’s that do want to restrict it)
- Then vote for Singh and the NDP as he’s the only Federal Leader that kind of has a chance to become PM, that opposes oil, and at least the Trudeau government is talking about removing oil subsidies.
Honestly the most daming thing about PP is that he's been in goverance since he finished uni, never held a real job in his life. Also I'm 100% sure he's never made a woman cum.
Two years still. Lots can change and people will see through the piss poor attempt at the Conservative rebranding of Poilievre.
People the world over have been remarkably bad at seeing through cheap far-right populist pandering. I don't trust the electorate.
We basically flip between Liberal and Conservative on schedule. Trudeau took a gamble on positive numbers calling the last election early but I think his brand is essentially dead. PP is getting a huge image treatment right now if you've seen his tanned face and new persona, like they're throwing full weight in to making him relatable, and you can tell what a massive effort that is lol. I don't see too much of a material difference between LPC and CPC though, CPC is more shameless but the things LPC does to sovereign nations inside our country should be setting off more alarm bells than they are. People forget those treaties are with the Crown not the Canadian government. Also fuck the Liberals for not changing the vote, they campaigned so hard on that and I can't believe I fell for it first time around. NDP are polling decently well too but with the voting being what it is they're screwed. Although I'm not a huge fan of Jagmeet and how he became leader and think NDP need to do better with their branding and messaging, right now it's like "we're liberals but more authentic" but they need to be more forthcoming with the economic vision and why it will benefit everyone regardless of their identity. A straight white tradesman needs to get the message that he has just as much interest in voting NDP as a nonconforming individual, and I think they really need to tie these messages back to the economic benefit and power of having solidarity with others in achieving material political goals.
Great summary, and good insight imo
A lot of NDP voters where I am at, but PP is going to get my vote. Cost of living is my #1 voting issue and Pierre is the only one I’ve even heard talking about it.
NDP and Liberals just don’t care about how much money I have left in my pockets at the end of the month, they think it’s all theirs anyways
On housing PP wants to "remove beurocracy" for developers which means they can build what will maximize their profits with less regard for regulations, and with the huge demand for housing this allows them to cater to mid-upper range of home buyers and cut corners. Milton and north Oakille are good case studies for this strategy where it's basically all dual-income managerial workers and white collar professionals living in blocked out subdivisions with cheaply made "luxury" homes.
Liberals just pulled their move today by waiving GST for rental unit developers but as usual it's a pandering half-measure.
NDP share the tax GHT/HST waiving for renters in their housing policy on top of using under-utilized federal land to build social and co-op housing right away, as well as forcing developers to build affordable housing with the communities and municipalities having more say. They also want to extend CMHC insured mortgages for first-time buyers to 30 years so people's monthly payments would be less. Although I think the down payment is the hurdle for most.
I'll tell you a secret nothing he does well influence it. Sure cost might godown but won't be because of any one running the country. If the president doesn't matter for the Is economy I would assume it's the same for us.
Short memory huh? Why do you think we are in such a mess in the first place?
https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/canada-s-banks-received-114b-bailout-study-asserts-1.803031
We're the only western country that didn't see a dip in housing in 2008/2009.
Can't wait!
im pretty sure they would close their borders and fast.
Never close your borders to another country's brain drain
Shit. I just DQ'd myself by not knowing how to embed an image on Mobile via Thunder
Wellll maybe not never . . . Looking at operation paperclip