theacharnian

joined 2 years ago
[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 22 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

As is tradition.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Aaaaand you circled back to a US political strategy that I've been arguing is not applicable to Canada. This is now a loop.

 

Source: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mark-carney-day-1-1.7479519

A Reuters photographer snapped a picture of Trudeau later carrying a House of Commons chair out of the West Block chamber as he winds down his time in government. Under parliamentary rules, an outgoing MP can purchase a replica of their chair in the chamber.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (3 children)

Loreto is saying that there is no material difference between the LPC and the CPC. The conservatives absolutely say they are different.

Ultimately though, here is what Loreto is actually saying:

The only real decision, then, isn’t whether or not to support the Liberals, but how you can use your energy and limited time to make something better, build something more powerful, that can force the Carneys of the world to make better decisions.

Bad faith, bad also kinda garbage, interpretation: "she's saying don't vote and that it doesn't matter, she's dampening the vote".

Good faith, useful, interpretation: "vote how you will, but know that if you want real change about real problems it will take more than just voting".

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 hours ago (5 children)

Conservative talking points? I have no idea what you're talking about.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (7 children)

Yes, because they won the conservative toss up seats and the Ontario Liberals and Ontario NDP could not bring themselves to cooperate. If you are arguing for strategic ABC voting, riding by riding, I'm right there with you bud. But that's not what you're arguing for. You're arguing for everyone to fall in line and vote Liberal, and not criticize Dear Leader, in some kind of pointless, nonsensical copy of the American "Blue No Matter Who" strategy. And if you think you're going to be able to bully non-Conservative voters to fall in line behind the Liberals no matter the local context, ben, bonne chance...

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 3 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (9 children)

You keep talking to me as if I'm campaigning for PP. You keep fighting shadows and not understanding what I'm telling you. This is Canada, we do not have the US two party system. We don't have a binary choice. We have a multi-party democracy.

EDIT: toned down the all-caps. Sheesh man.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 4 points 8 hours ago

My understanding is that Carney is a pragmatist, rather than a Keynesian per se, so he's not shied away from using Keynesian economics in times of crisis. I think he self-described himself like that in his first post-election speech. So, I would think that if the trade war with the US becomes a crisis, a Carney cabinet would not shy away from government stimulus. But that's not to say that in "regular times" he would do not operate as a run-of-the-mill neoliberal.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 hours ago (11 children)

You're fighting shadows buddy. Not only that, you're projecting on the Canadian system an American political strategy, which is just silly, because the game is entirely different. My riding is a tossup between the Liberals and the NDP. The Conservatives are barely fourth. Flipping it to the NDP, does nothing for the Conservatives: if you haven't noticed, we've had an NDP-supported minority government for 3 and a half years. Were I in a Conservative tossup riding, I'd vote and advocate for ABC hands down. But don't you fucking dare barf crap like "if you’re campaigning against the Liberals you are campaigning for the Conservatives" at me. This is Canada, not some fucking swing state.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 hours ago

Only, thankfully, in Canada we don't have a stupid two-party system that forces people to make impossible choices. In Canada such a framing would only apply to the ridings swinging between L and C. But other than that, we're a pluralistic democracy and I see no reason why left wing critiques of the center should be shouted down.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca -5 points 10 hours ago (15 children)

What a bad faith thought-stopping thing to say. Check my post history, I'm not here to shill for whatever.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 hours ago

It will not solve our problems.

Well, yea, I mean that's the whole point of the article.

Now one might agree or disagree with the claim of an "even more rabid conservative party", but recent experience kind of validates that, right? Biden was a parenthesis in between two fascist waves, and similarly Draghi (someone exceptionally similar to Carney) was a parenthesis between the 5SM and Meloni. Elsewhere in Europe, too, centrists like Macron or Starmer of Scholz have not addressed the underlying issues that bolster the far right and seem to just be only helping to move the Overton Window so that they end up being "the left".

 

The reality is that the next federal election will not save us, and regardless of what you think of my writing, you certainly know this deep down. Even a Carney reprieve is unlikely to stave off an even more rabid Conservative party in the next election after this one. But if we aren’t clear-eyed about what is happening, then we sure as hell cannot see where we’re going. And to have a banker, a CEO’s man in the office of Prime Minister, it is going to bring with it a world of challenges that near certainly will pave the road for someone worse than Poilievre.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

We're also underestimating how much Americans pay for insurance every month. It's like a whole second rent. Which I guess we pay through higher taxation but then again, we don't have to worry about setting up a gofundme if we get sick. Not to mention the secondary effects of this precarity: the whole premise of Breaking Bad for example doesn't make sense in Canada.

 

A 2000 percent increase in fentanyl sounds super scary until you realize that what we're really talking about is going from 1 kilo to 21 kilos.

 

At the end of the day, Canada is many things. But above all else, we’re a bunch of grudge holding motherfuckers. You’ve taken your shot at us, so now we won’t rest until we get you back.

 

Canada should not respond to potential U.S. tariffs with retaliatory tariffs, as this would primarily harm Canadian consumers by driving up prices. Instead, Canada should leverage its industrial and technological capabilities to undermine the monopolistic rent-seeking of American corporations by legalizing and promoting third-party modifications, repairs, and alternative marketplaces for technology, agriculture, and other industries. By dismantling restrictive intellectual property laws—many of which were imposed under the USMCA trade agreement—Canada could become a global hub for jailbreaks, independent app stores, and right-to-repair solutions, thereby reducing dependence on U.S. tech monopolies and fostering a new high-tech economy that directly benefits Canadian consumers and businesses.

view more: next ›