OldCM wrote:I don't know if Canada has "impeachment" provisions or not but this seems like an impeachable offensel to me. Or perhaps at least a Parliamentary vote of no confidence might do the same thing. I am not familiar with Canada's constitution as you might gather from my previous comments here.
The Supreme Canuck wrote: No, we're a Westminster Parliamentary system. We have no impeachment provisions. Instead we have what is known as "Responsible Government" which requires that the sitting government enjoy the confidence of the Commons. If they lose a confidence vote, they get turfed and we go to election (or the Governor General steps in and appoints a new government from the sitting House, but that gets complicated). Unfortunately, for various reasons I won't go into here, since at least the Trudeau government the system has eroded due to the increasing power of party, caucus, and PM. There are reforms on the books that are going to a vote later this year, but that doesn't help us here.
As to book burnings, no. There were no literal burnings. They just sent the books to a landfill. No better, in my opinion.
Honestly, this is just another manifestation of behaviour that the Tories are well known for. They want to sell oil, so they deny the existence of global warming (well, there are platitudes said, but no more than that) and kneecap any science that is critical of their stance. It's a cynical pragmatism that has defined the Harper government since it was elected. Principle has no place. If it helps you and you can get away with it, it's a good idea.
It's disgusting. It's indicative of a particular conservative mindset that you'll find in Canada, similar to the Tea Party, but... I don't know. It's hard to describe. It has a different flavour to it. More of a "This regressive thing is common sense, and anyone who disagrees is a naïve idiot, and probably a foreigner. Fancy-pants liberal ivory tower elitists..."
Said angrily. And daring you to disagree. It's a... bullying attempt to convince you that their pseudo-populist ideas are actual, indisputable reality? An attempt to create and maintain privilege for their in-group? A genuinely held belief that their regressive ideas are superior to whatever those damned liberals say?
I don't know. It's hard to get a handle on it. It got Rob Ford elected, though.
The Supreme Canuck wrote:It's disgusting. It's indicative of a particular conservative mindset that you'll find in Canada, similar to the Tea Party, but... I don't know. It's hard to describe. It has a different flavour to it. More of a "This regressive thing is common sense, and anyone who disagrees is a naïve idiot, and probably a foreigner. Fancy-pants liberal ivory tower elitists..."
Said angrily. And daring you to disagree. It's a... bullying attempt to convince you that their pseudo-populist ideas are actual, indisputable reality? An attempt to create and maintain privilege for their in-group? A genuinely held belief that their regressive ideas are superior to whatever those damned liberals say?
Swift wrote:TSC - a question for you: Does Rupert Murdoch own any media outlets (newspapers, TV) in Canada? Not that he invented this, but in the US and the UK , he is probably the current expert on these tactics.
There are two complimentary aspects to his method, demonstrated on a daily basis by Fox News (and other outlets). First is the creation and conversion of pseudo-populist ideas into indisputable facts, as you say. But the other half of it is equally as bad, and it is their defense when confronted with the observations that a lot of their so-called-facts are wrong.
They try to put forth the proposition that all news outlets lie, and all so-called "news" is actually just opinions and is biased. That's even in their slogan "fair and balanced". All the other media outlets are not giving news and facts, they are just presenting things with their bias, and they are just balancing things out. There is no actual reality, it is all just differing opinions, and so their opinion is as good as anyone else's.
This dismisal of an objective reality, and of objective presentations of it, lets you dismiss anything that disagrees with your beliefs. It is the ultimate equality, and makes crap equivalent to gold. It is a very powerful tool. It allows you dismiss things with solid evidence, like climate change, with a simple "well, that's your opinion". It allow Gretchen Carlson's opinon on climate change to be equal to that of professional climatologist.
Swift wrote:TSC - a question for you: Does Rupert Murdoch own any media outlets (newspapers, TV) in Canada? Not that he invented this, but in the US and the UK , he is probably the current expert on these tactics.
FZR1KG wrote:I really have to thank the USA on behalf of Australians everywhere.
Murdoch was an Australia and wanted to break into the US market.
The US media control laws required that to be a majority owner in a media outlet you had to be a US citizen.
So Murdoch renounced his Australian citizenship and became a US citizen.
While this law is designed to protect the US it effectively is easily bypassed, as demonstrated.
So now the US has taken under its wings the spawn of Satan and he left Australia.
FZR1KG wrote:I really have to thank the USA on behalf of Australians everywhere.
...
It was a great sacrifice your country did for us.
A sacrifice worthy of remembering for centuries to come. lol
Swift wrote:FZR1KG wrote:You are welcome. Please keep it in mind when we have reverted to a Third World dictatorship and we need you to send us food.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests