'trane

ok, i've tried not to get into politics as much here recently, but this should be deeply insulting to everyone who cares about honesty and integrity in parliament:

Why is Harper’s team invoking Hitler to debate New Democrats? - The Globe and Mail

fuck i hate this kind of politics. there is no won here, just dirty, dirty pool.

LX

Karl Rove's effect on our politics has taken its full course. I just hope it doesn't have the kind of lasting effect here it has in the US.

pzabby

it's sad indeed what harper's brought canada's sacred house of commons to. However, for the first time in my life, I agree on an issue with Harper. Canada should stay in afghanistan past 2014, as that country is still in dire need of assistance, where a large part of the population believes in the sick twisted ideas of religious extremists. The only reason I agree with Harper here is because I think of the young afghan girls, being given off into a polygymy family, having their genitalia mutilated, all based on some ancient sick belief. However, I in no way support the way in which Harper is defending his move.

As well, With the former NDP/CCF leader issue on Hitler's Germany, I have a question for the members on this forum. Had Canada not gone to the war in 1939, and played neutral until attacked, and gained profits while the war was at war, where do you think Canada would be today? Would we be a stronger international presence, more similar to the U.S in terms of economic effect, etc? why or why not?

Someguy again

harper's "rebuttal" is ridiculous. absolutely ridiculous. parties change their names, but the people change and so do the attitudes.


cute. just because harper feels entitled to help young afghan girls means we have to keep our troops in a country where the majority clearly does not want us and using military force is just making it worse.

if harper is so noble, why is the gap between the poor and the rich increasing? why is he so delighted to find out that the north pole is melting so that he can drill oil north to benefit canada?why are the programs that support the underprivileged throughout canada being cut to overpay the supervisors that inspect these programs, when they clearly don't do jack shit but make "adjustments" for "improvement"

Claudius

I saw that comment yesterday and I'm flabbergasted at his response. Yet, it's one in a long line of ridiculous things this government has said/done. Politics in Canada have changed in the past few years, for the negative.

The attack ads on an INTERIM leader in Bob Rae for example show this. Not even in an election and the negative ads are run.

LX

I find the fraudulent tactics used in the election the most disturbing, but it's all the same package. There is a complete severing of ethics from politics and that leads to some terrible results that are hard to repair, and it feeds extremism. I don't think Canadians are all that prone to falling into extremist to and fros though, and with any kind of reflection this is all going to fail miserably. I'm hoping the failure of the Wild Rose party signals such a future outcome. The Conservatives just look weaker by the day. Canada is different. Harper might need to look for Canadian advisors instead of Ralph Reed with his Rove play book.

pzabby

on the contrary, the freedom of the afghan people has significantly increased since the Taliban left, and has been incrementally increasing ever since. The problem with that state is extreme poverty, and a lack of any sort of plan to fix it. They don't have resources to sell, they don't have things which interest foreign investment, and tourism doesn't work in a war wasteland.

oh and btw, I am massively anti harper, and anti conservative, and I agree with pretty much everything you said in your second paragraph.

Ligeia

The whole criticism is so lame and intellectually bankrupt that it is almost a waste of time to discuss it. I think an MP from the NDP said they would move on from the issue instead of wasting time on non-substantive debates.

To name just a few problems with the criticism:

1. CCF did not exist in 1939.
2. Woodsworth was indeed a staunch pacifist, but many members of his party were not. His dedication to pacifism, in light of the desires of the rest of the party, is at least partly the reason why he sought to step down from the CCF in the early 40's.
3. Is the entire party to be impugned for the beliefs of an individual?
4. Do beliefs in the past, held by an individual or collective, reflect at all on the validity of the argument at present?

Harper learned so much from his earlier losses. He learned how important message control and "framing" are to your political success. It is ultimately to the detriment of our democracy if we fail to see through such thinly-veiled, ideological poppycock.

pzabby

you're posts are intellectually stimulating, and make me laugh when necessary, was waiting for your take on this. You didn't dissapoint

LX

The pacificist position is not without merit either. There was a chance to take in the Jewish population instead of participating in a war that ultimately left all diminished. But I'm glad to see the response as it is. I really believe Harper is going to end up covered in muck.

pzabby

You know, I was actually discussing what Canada did with the war as opposed to the U.S and this possibility came up. Now we'll never know if Hitler's actual intention was to kill of all the Jewish people, (I don't know how that's even possible since it's a belief that you can switch to and not necessarily determined solely at birth), but if it was, and Canada did take in the jewish nationals, instead of helping out Europe, wouldn't you say Hitler would have aimed his sights on Canada? And a weak Canada at the time, I don't think would have been able to defend against that (but then again there's so much maneuvering needed to be done with the atlantic that noone knows how it would have went down).

that being said, I'm extremely proud that Canada helped out Britain and ultimately the world. What the U.S did was piss poor, and well defines the U.S till today. Oportunist piss poor human beings not giving a fuck about others unless it somehow benefits themselves. We put the largest percentage of our population (already decimated severely from the first world) into the war in terms of troops, nurses, etc, and sure, if we hadn't and not given a fuck we'd be stronger, but would we want to be regarded as selfish, maniacle, bastards?


I sing it everyday and at the beginning of the semester, if I'm in a class with people who don't know me I get giggles, but I never give a fuck! and eventually, i get commended for it. Love what this country stands for.

that being said, Harper's doing a royal job of fucking it up.

Someguy again

there are other means to achieve peace and creating democratic system in countries like these, other than invasion and military supervision. (see: arab spring protests.) i'm not saying that a public outcry that leads to protest will end in a peaceful manner but it's much better than having a foreign country come in by force and just stir up the hornets nest and expect quick results before they leave. when the people take control of their situation in their own way, they can address the problems that are needed to the citizens much more quickly. obviously these are all givens, it all depends on who takes over or how things pan out.

simple, (well not really) they have people. an educated population goes a long way to improvement in the standards of living in society. i have faith that an improved educational system with intellectuals and activists that are leading a informed public of their plans could easily find a way to improve their situation and benefit not only to their own country but to the world as well.

pzabby

for education to be able to bring a country out of extreme poverty, it would require decades. It is not as simple as a+b+c. This country's been at war for nearly 40 years, you can't expect to have it fix itself quickly, and I don't think they'll be able to on their own. Radical Islam has taken hold of that country, it's not just the Taliban organization, some people there genuinly believe in things like genital mutilation, stoning a woman to death for measly crimes, etc. It's dumb, sure, but its their dark ages and Islam is a much more fierce adversary to overcome than Christianity, just because of Islam's fundamental belief that it is right, and should not be changed in any way, because it is god's last word to the people.

Claudius

pzabby, you made a point of "what the US did was piss poor". Is that in regards to WWII? Do you mind expanding on that point? Also in regards to your point with Hitler (i.e. us not knowing if he ever wanted to kill all Jewish people) could you expand on that point?

LX

And could you maybe help me understand why your sense of Nationalism is different from the Nationalism that Hitler strengthened and exploited?

As for the saving of Jewish lives, it would have taken all the allies to negotiate a peace and the emigration of the Jewish population, which ended up being used as hostages in the attempt to keep the US out of the conflict. Once the US entered the war the Final Solution was greatly accelerated, and our failure to at least try to save lives by seeking a peace for at least as long as those lives could be saved, is a bit of a blight. In essence the Allies sacrificed the victims of the holocaust in order to attain their victory. Such is war. And there were other sacrifices of innocents, and the dehumanizing of some of our own population beyond that. So Pacificism, although difficult to defend in practical terms considering the nature of the enemy, still stands on pretty solid moral grounds.

pzabby

well i exaggerated with the "piss poor" comment but I was referring to how the U.S sat down and did nothing for three years, only collecting massive finances, while the rest of the world was fighting off Hitler. It is, in my opinion, those three years which put U.S in the position they are today (outside of the economic crisis).

As with the jewish comment, I was referring to the fact that some say Hitler used the Jewish hate as something to uninize the german people, to strengthen the loyalty of the members of the state, so he could carry on his quest of world domination. Hate is a powerful emotion, and when mixed in with nationalism, can be deadly. So really it was either he was taking advantage of the concept that the german people thought they were the perfect race and that the jews were "ruining their race" or he truly did believe it himself to the extent to which it was portrayed.

pzabby

well because my nationalism is based on what we do. If our leader ends up doing things which are horrendous, of course I wouldn't back them, just as I have never backed Harper.

bjjs

That's politics