...while the Conservatives are focused on christofascist virtue signaling.
Vote better, Canada.
this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2023
7 points (60.0% liked)
CanadaPolitics
1907 readers
125 users here now
Placeholder for any r/CanadaPolitics refugees
Rules:
All of Lemmy.ca's rules apply
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No porn.
- No Ads / Spamming.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
That's our choice: ineffective when not driven by the Orange party, vs actually indolent and evil. No one else can get in under FPtP, so that's it.
The people that didn't show up could have elected a pile of bricks to the Ontario and made one Premier -even under FPTP. Political apathy is a much bigger threat than the electoral system -and the later is used by propagandists to drive the former.
There's a push right now for a National Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform to be created. An NDP MP, in cooperation with a Green MP, is putting forward a motion (M-86) to that effect. Parliament will vote on this either this Fall or early Winter.
Petition (sign today): https://www.danielblaikie.ca/a_citizens_assembly
The problem with the other systems is that they put an inordinate amount of power in the hands of fringe parties. If, for example, Alberskatchetoba managed to elect a few open fascists and they are deciding votes for who gets into power we end up with a small group of fascists dictating government policy. We need a system that truly reflects the will on the majority of Canadians. If we had that all of the christofascist virtue signaling hate would be off the table. The vast majority of Canadians want women to have the choice, LGBTQ to have rights, etc.
After Trump and Scott Moe and Ron DeSantis, this argument no longer persuades me. We have this problem of a few fringe extremists getting in already. I'll take a real reprentative democracy in exchange for a few more.
Isreal
We need a system that truly reflects the will on the majority of Canadians.
We have that. It is called FPTP. It forgoes being a party system entirely and sees that leaders hire an individual they want to have represent them. Each representative meets with the leaders in their home riding, gathers a general consensus from the town square, and then carries that consensus to Ottawa (or respective provincial capital) where it is combined with every other riding doing the same. The outcome is that the will of the majority is realized.
That may be what we need, but it is not what we want. The reality is that being the leader sucks and meeting in the town square regularly is hard work. People just want to vote for (or maybe not even that much) who they think is the best dictator and let the the dictator do his thing – perhaps with some checks and balances to make sure the dictatorial power doesn't go completely to his head. We've tried to hack that onto FPTP over the years, but it was never designed for that mode of use, and as you would expect the results are dismal. Indeed, we do need a new system if we want to not have to express our will.
We have that. It is called FPTP. [...] The outcome is that the will of the majority is realized.
That's just nonsense. You don't seem to have any connection to reality.
Stephen Harper ran up the deficit and the debt, destroyed years of scientific research, muzzled government experts who didn't agree with his christofascist dogma, and had the support of 36.3%, 37.7%, and 39.6% of the popular vote. At no point did he have the support of the majority of Canadians.
Our current Liberal + NDP government with 50.44% of the popular vote is the closes things we've had in a very long time to a government that represents the will of the majority of Canadians.
That may [...] express our will.
More fantastic nonsense.
What happens if New Brunswick of Alberta manage to elect a couple of christfascists and those people hold the balance of power. What if they demand that PP take away women's rights and the rights of the LGBTQ Canadians? 56% of Canadians agree that women should have the right to choose and that percentage is growing. 85% support LGBTQ rights. Why should a few extremists be allowed to force the government to go against the will of the majority of the people as a result of a quirk of our electoral system?
The NDP national dental care plan which they forced the Liberals to implement actually has the support of 72% of Canadians. In that case a party that truly cares for the well being of the people is forcing a useless, old school party to follow the will of the people. As I said, this is the most democratic government we've had in a long time.
Look, I know your way is to spew fantastic nonsense that has no connection to reality. If you want to have a conversation based in reality we can. I'm not going to argue with your fantasies.
At no point did he have the support of the majority of Canadians.
We went over this:
"The reality is that being the leader sucks and meeting in the town square regularly is hard work. People just want to vote for (or maybe not even that much) who they think is the best dictator and let the the dictator do his thing [...] We’ve tried to hack that onto FPTP over the years, but it was never designed for that mode of use, and as you would expect the results are dismal. Indeed, we do need a new system if we want to not have to express our will."
Was there something in that which was not clear?
What happens if New Brunswick of Alberta manage to elect a couple of christfascists and those people hold the balance of power. What if they demand that PP take away women’s rights and the rights of the LGBTQ Canadians?
Honestly, I am unsure of what this is trying to say. My best interpretation is that it is still trying to point out that our bastardized attempt to turn FPTP into something it is not has failed, but that would just be repeating the quote quoted above it, so clearly I have missed the mark.
“The reality is that being the leader sucks and meeting in the town square regularly is hard work. People just want to vote for (or maybe not even that much) who they think is the best dictator and let the the dictator do his thing […] We’ve tried to hack that onto FPTP over the years, but it was never designed for that mode of use, and as you would expect the results are dismal. Indeed, we do need a new system if we want to not have to express our will.”
Was there something in that which was not clear?
What you're saying is a strange, fantasy that has no connection to reality.
Honestly, I am unsure of what this is trying to say. My best interpretation is that it is still trying to point out that our bastardized attempt to turn FPTP into something it is not has failed, but that would just be repeating the quote quoted above it, so clearly I have missed the mark.
Sorry...I'm not interested in talking about your fantasies. We really need to discuss the reality of the Canadian political situation.
Have a good day.
We really need to discuss the reality of the Canadian political situation.
Well, no. The context of discussion centres around an earlier commenter's claim that "We need a system that truly reflects the will on the majority of Canadians." That cannot discuss the reality of the Canadian political situation as it is fundamentally forward looking to a reality which does not yet exist. FPTP, used as it was designed, is very well suited to achieving what is stated.
But it does mean that the people have to express their will, and they have proven that they don't want to. They prefer to spend time focusing on their job, their family, friends, writing internet comments, etc. And fair enough. They want to hand control to a higher power and get back to their individual lives. FPTP is not at all suited to that.
FPTP, used as it was designed, is very well suited to achieving what is stated.
No, it isn't, as I said above. The Harper government was elected three times with less than 40% of the popular vote and did all the things that Conservatives do, ran up the deficit, ran up the debt, cut taxes for the rich and corporations, cut services for everyone else, burned decades of scientific research and muzzled government experts to push his christofascist dogmatic agenda, passed unconstitutional laws as a dog whistle to his christofascist base then spent millions of dollars defending them to the Supreme Court only to have 100% of those unconstutitional laws struck down. How is that representing the majority of Canadians when then had the support of less than 40%?
The current Liberal + NDP agreement government far better represents the will of the people but it's a quirk of the FPTP system.
The Harper government
Yeah, no. The fact that you can actually name the dictator tells that this is not FPTP as it was designed. That is how it has come to be used, because people don't want to express their will, but that has already been talked about to death.
Again, the FPTP system was designed to have the people select one representative who gathers locally to talk about their concerns and objectives with the local people. The representative then takes the result of that to Ottawa to combine with all of the other localities that have done the same to reach an ultimate consensus. The representative's actions in Ottawa are recorded to make sure he has honoured what took place locally.
That is not how we use it. It has been bastardized to the point that it makes no sense. But we could if wanted to have the will of the majority represented. There is nothing stopping us other than doing the democratic work a democracy expects. The only possibly better way to have the will represented is to have us all travel to Ottawa and all gather together. That doesn't scale so well, though, and it's a long way from Vancouver.
The current Liberal + NDP agreement government far better represents the will of the people but it’s a quirk of the FPTP system.
To be fair, it's also quirky that you have been able to determine the will of the people as they don't usually want to express their will. Typically they'd rather let someone else figure it out. Hence how we got here.
The fact that you can actually name the dictator tells that this is not FPTP as it was designed.
You see? This is the kind of nonsense that is disconnected from reality. Harper was freely and fairly elected and was defeated in a free and fair election. He was nothing approaching a dictator.
I'm simply not willing to continue to discuss this with you if you're not making arguments that are connected to reality.
Have a good day.
Harper was freely and fairly elected and was defeated in a free and fair election.
The only time Harper was not elected in a Canadian federal election was the first one he participated in. He resigned from politics about six months after his last election win. Maybe you are trying to imply that the resignation was a defeat? But that did not happen during the election.
Are you, maybe, talking about an election other than the Canadian federal election?
He was nothing approaching a dictator.
It sure seemed like you were trying to say that he had total control over the country at one time. I do not disagree. If that is not the case, why did you bring him up?
Sorry...your position is so ridiculous that there is no room for discussion.
Funny, as I stopped having a position a while ago. I long moved to trying to figure out your position as it is in no way clear.
Some pretty simple questions in that last comment that would help clarify things. Is there a reason you are afraid to answer them?
Your positions are so absurd that there is no chance to have a reasonable conversation.
What kind of conversation would we have had if, hypothetically, they were not absurd?
- Rocket - "[...]"
- MapleEngineer - "Yup, that's how it is."
- Rocket - "Yup, sure is."
- MapleEngineer - "Yup. Guess that's all there is to say about that."
- Rocket - "Yup."
Reasonable conversation is predicated on starting with the absurd. I give you the benefit of the doubt that you are trying, in good faith, to provide information to take us from the absurd to something sensible, but I am honestly not clear in what you are trying to say. My attempts to figure it out have been stonewalled.
MapleEngineer: I'm going to come over and fuck your wife.
Rocket: The fuck you are.
MapleEngineer: Let's negotiate and find some middle ground. Maybe she can just give me a blowjob.
When your opening position is absurd there is literally no room for discussion. You always take the most ridiculously extreme and absurd position. That leaves no room for reasonable discussion.
Yeah, more like:
- MapleEngineer - "I need to drive a nail into this piece of wood."
- Rocket - "Here is a hammer. It is well suited to the task."
- MapleEngineer - "No thanks. I tried a using a hammer to insert a screw last time and it didn't work. Not only did it not work, but I hit my thumb and ended up in the hospital."
- Rocket - "Maybe it is not a nail that you need to drive, but to fasten the wood? A staple gun might be the ticket."
- MapleEngineer – "Buddy of a friend of a pal's wife was bludgeoned to death by a hammer. There is no room for discussion if you are going to be so absurd."
Have a nice day.
Oh yeah, I forgot to add that at the end of every other reply. Sorry about the oversight.
Anyway, if you want a demonstration of absurd, this is what has become absurd. Back to the actual topic of conversation. I believe we have some outstanding questions.
I'm especially interested to learn which election Harper lost after having won one. Trying to wrap my head around your interesting mind further, it dawned on me that maybe you were trying to say that he was Prime Minister and then he lost that position. The trouble with that theory is that the Prime Minister is not elected in the Canadian federal election. It is an appointed position.
The trouble with addressing the housing crisis, climate, health care, and affordability crises in Canada is that all of these things require provincial partnership. The Premiers have figured out the best way to stick with (mostly) US RW styled/influenced radicalization methods while simultaneously harming federal leadership is to abstain from partnering to help Canadians. It's a pretty great scam for the billionaire class. Moscrop often leaves out important details like these in his pieces. The reality is as long as the GOP-North Cons have an iron grip on the provinces, the beatings will continue.
He mentions it here >There’s some truth to the contention that many of these failures fall within provincial jurisdiction. But the federal government has a long history of intervening in and shaping policies at the provincial level, so that’s hardly an excuse.
And it isn't an excuse -- it is a FACT. Maybe 30 years ago the Feds could influence Premiers, but not anymore. The 'Conservatives' have been completely overtaken by DeSantis-trumpism and post-truth narratives. David Moscrop needs to snap out of the notion the RW wants to deal for the betterment of our country -- they don't.
Maybe 30 years ago the Feds could influence Premiers, but not anymore.
The feds have "convinced" all of the provinces to implement a carbon tax, $10/day childcare, and national reporting for healthcare (I'm pretty sure about the last one, but I may be wrong).
The federal government has leverage. If they want to use it.
They have managed to do some things -- yes. But the big things will NEVER happen Not as long as Cons have the ability to block the road. This includes if the NDP were elected Federally and wanted to do the same things. We need to elect non-Cons provincially across the board, or we lose our democracy. It's that simple.
I don’t see why you say that. Poilievre is apparently in favour of using carrots and sticks to make cities approve more housing. Liberals could do the same and dare Conservatives to vote against it. I’m very unsympathetic to all these excuses.
That said, agree that we need to vote non-Con provincially. I sometimes have no idea why Canadians vote the way they do. Every province has a healthcare crisis, growing inequality and unaffordability, and yet voters keep voting in conservatives. Makes no sense.
The affordability problem requires more than a Doug Fraud styled approach. This article here is a more productive approach to the GOP-north CPC problem we face: https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2023/09/08/Defeat-Poilievre-Politics-Abandonment/
This is a nice article and I agree with it. But I don’t see any mention of housing or Doug Ford style policies, so I’m a little confused why you posted it. I gave housing as one example of something Liberals could address, but frankly, I don’t have any faith that they want to meaningfully address it. Every single policy JT has proposed has raised demand, like the first time home buyers tax free savings account, a tax cut for the rich which will only help those who have maxed out their TFSA. Where is the non-market housing? Where are the co-ops? We also need to stop cities from denying new housing, like they’ve done in California, Boston, New Zealand, and other progressive places. (If that’s what you’re calling a Doug Ford style approach, I strongly disagree. It’s delusional to think we don’t need more supply.)
For many decades, protecting people's "home investment" values have been central to winning politics in Canada for both the Liberals and Conservatives because home owners are a huge and powerful voting block. The CPC are bucking that trend, and I think it will work this time. I don't think the Liberals have caught on to the change in the winds. They will probably change course mid- to late- campaign.
There's plenty of things the feds could do to help housing. Instead they implemented programs to fuel demand.
Like I said -- nothing can take place without buy in, messaging and assistance from the US owned Premiers.
How would the Feds adding a capped capital gains tax exemption on primary homes sales (a la the US) need the Premiers? How about taxing homes 20+% beyond a primary residence like Singapore? Lots of options...
How about it? Sell these ideas to your local representatives and get the word out! Let's go!
Moving the goalposts: first you claim the feds are powerless, and when proven wrong you demand that the poster does all the work instead of admitting that you were wrong. You can do better than that.
Please educate yourselves on propaganda. If you do not understand propaganda it is being used effectively against you. Two recent examples are Brexit in Britain and the 57% of Ontario voters that stayed home. Also if you are paying attention many trump like policies passed at the CPC convention. The CPC may as well be the Canadian trump party.
Good article. I quite like David Moscrop's articles.
I would love to give the NDP a chance but alas...
Alas what? You vote for change, or you get more of the same.
....given our countries previous voting patterns it's unlikely to happen next election. And considering I'm from Alberta my NDP vote doesn't amount to much.
Sounds like you are in a place where voting your conscience has no downside. The NDP went from nothing to almost winning a couple of cycles ago before the Liberals found a celebrity to win over everyone. If it ever happens again, it won't be predictable.
You're right but there always a fear that I'd be splitting the vote by going NDP. I think I'll stick to my guns this election.
I wouldn't. Their hearts are in the right place but on a policy level Singh's NDP is just completely incoherent. About the only specific policy of theirs I like is introducing more taxes on wealth, not just working income.