Canadian Politics Thread

I guess I was thinking in terms of power = economic clout. in 2011, Ontario totalled 261 billion in trade with the USA; Icelandic/USA trade totalled 842 million. We did 29 billion with China, compared to 5.7 million between China and Iceland. (I actually looked this stuff up, although that last one required a conversion that I may have flubbed.) But I'm sure there are lots of other factors like those you mention that play a part in what constitutes power. (If Ontario's financial sector collapsed, wouldn't the ripple effects around the world be large and immediate?)

I'm no economist but from a layman's perspective, I find it unlikely that that could happen as a result of decisions made at the provincial level, while I could easily see how something like that could happen as a result of federal/national decisions (as it did in Iceland). Foreign policy, including the major decisions concerning international trade, is under federal jurisdiction. The provincial government certainly plays a role but I'm really sceptical that those ON-China trade figures are influenced as heavily by provincial policies as by federal policies.

I mean, I'm not even sure what it means to talk about "Ontario's financial sector" when all the major banks are chartered and regulated on a national basis and operate nationwide.

More shenanigans:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/story/2013/02/05/pol-conservatives-admit-robocalls-saskatchewan.html

And really, what are they saying about "Saskatchewan values"? Why do urban voters not represent them? Going by Wiki numbers, 43% of the province lives in Regina or Saskatoon.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/professors-defend-tom-flanagans-right-to-express-views-on-child-porn/article9238213/?cmpid=rss1

How controversial is it that I think the reaction to Tom Flanagan's comments has been a bit absurd? It seems like a defensible position to me to question whether someone deserves go to jail for looking at child porn and even to question whether that act in itself victimizes someone. (Creating a demand for someone else to victimize a child is definitely bad but it's not the exact same thing. Perhaps it should be a crime but I think it's fair to raise the question.) In any case, I don't see why expressing this idea should lead to the shunning he's experienced. While I often disagreed with him, I always enjoyed hearing his views on Power and Politics.

I agree with you. Although apparently he was also on the NAMBLA mailing list too. Kinda asking for it, wasn't he?

And U of Calgary has announced his retirement now?? I hope it's not just for expressing an idea.

xpost

considering that this guy enjoyed academic freedom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Philippe_Rushton

I am guessing he got the NAMBLA letter because a detractor signed him up for it as a prank.

my opinion: the idea that it victimizes a former victim by looking at the crime perpetrated on them is quite dubious to me. it reminds me of those peoples that believed taking a picture of them would steal their soul. it would be better to justify laws against child pornography on the basis of the economic support of their production.

So should it not be a crime to look at child porn if you didn't pay for it then? For the sake of argument, should we also prosecute people who purchase e.g. clothes that were stitched by children in the developing world, which also provides economic support for the exploitation of children? For all I know, the Macbook Pro I'm typing this on may have been made by exploited Chinese workers. Does jailing someone for looking at child porn instead of giving them treatment and support actually help anyone? I don't have a really firm opinion on these questions but there are certainly many questions that could be raised, which should not lead to ostracism imo.

Should people who purchase regular pornography be treated like johns?

There might also a moral support of the production by watching it even if you don't pay. comparable to people who upload torrents just for the recognition (eztv etc). not sure if it should be illegal on these terms though.

I would be fine with punishing people who knowingly bought slave labor goods. not that this will ever happen.

I had considered this line of thinking re: listening to music containing uncleared samples (like, say, on just about any hip hop mixtape); like, if you wanted to do the slippery slope argument, could someone be guilty of copyright violation in such a case? Child porn obviously a whole different thing of course, and I'm still not sure how I feel about this whole controversy. Punishing academics for making academic inquiries is never advisable in my mind, but occasionally tricky (see the aforementioned Rushton link).

Aargh, this government's constant disregard for academic freedom :
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/03/15/library-and-archives-canada/

So nice to see Harper branching out from only silencing his own people.

Give the man credit: he's been silencing scientists for a while.

Ha! My bf piped up with this exact point just as I submitted post.

I thought this was a fair point btw: I had considered this line of thinking re: listening to music containing uncleared samples (like, say, on just about any hip hop mixtape); like, if you wanted to do the slippery slope argument, could someone be guilty of copyright violation in such a case?

Thanks!

If you think about the context of PT's "Just watch me"--the actual lives impacted--Justin's use of it falls somewhere between questionable and tasteless. But it does show he has his father's gift for getting under people's skin.

http://storage.canoe.ca/v1/dynamic_resize/sws_path/suns-prod-images/1297391842494_LARGE_BOX.jpg?quality=80&size=210x&stmp=1363804950181

I was at a film and missed everything this afternoon. Sorry, but here's something I wrote almost a year ago here, the day after the last federal election:

If he fulfills a need, I don't think his qualifications will matter. (I wouldn't, but someone else might say the same of Obama.) The second Justin Trudeau entered politics, the logical endpoint was that he'd one day become Prime Minister and rekindle whatever it was that his father shared with the country. (At both ends of the spectrum--I'm sure he'd also be as hated as his father was by some percentage of the electorate.)

The reaction fell somewhere between skepticism and disbelief.

I'm not saying "I told you so." Not yet--I'm saving that for if he wins the next election (i.e., if he runs a disastrous campaign and loses, the contention that making him leader would be a dumb move will have been proven to be right).

35% support at this moment makes me skeptical that he can win an election

Is that support or approval? If it's support, where do the other two parties stand right now?--could he squeeze out a minority? (If that's approval nationwide, no, that's not good.)

I'm less sceptical of his chance of success than I used to be, though I personally still see little reason to be inspired by him. We'll have to see how he performs.

Even if the LPC were to win an election and stay the course on economics while moving back to a more traditional Canadian approach on foreign policy and showing greater respect for academic freedom, I'd see that as a significant improvement, so I guess I'm open.

https://www.facebook.com/paulinemarois/posts/10151555111481310

Ugh. Doomed to fail, though, right?

I mean, it probably says something about where we are in Canadian politics that when I read that, I don't even take it seriously as a genuine attempt at separation. I just wonder "What political angle could she be going for?"

And then think "maybe she wants to lose the next election and take up raising orchids?"

PQ is flailing imho

yeah

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qKps7uG6eM

This worked out really well for McCain in 2008, so there's no reason it won't work again.

I'm outside of Canada currently. Did the attack ads already start?

And it's true. A lot of people were already hating Bush Jr and the Republican party more and more by the end of his term, just as people are getting tired of Harpo now. So, Justin has that in his favour. I'm sure he'll take advantage of it, just as Obama took advantage of people's hate towards Bush Jr.

Personally, I feel the Liberals will need to fight the perception that the Tories have 'provided' a better economy for the country, which, of course, they only inherited but that's not what the average Conservative voter seems to think. Or has this changed? I've been gone for about a year now.

I'm currently reading John English's other biography on Trudeau, Citizen of the World. Pretty interesting.

Cheap but I can't resist (and don't entirely disagree): http://leftistjab.blogspot.ca/2013/04/the-haters-guide-to-justin-trudeau.html?m=1

the quotes in that (attack ad) are taken so wildly out of context that even the N Post is calling them out on it. i figure, with enough rope these guys are going to inevitably hit a Campbell/Chretien note so uncalled for that Canadians are united in their disgust.

xpost

so he was taking his clothes off for a liver disease charity and he was paraphrasing pierre in the quote about quebecker superiority? stay classy harper

http://ideas.time.com/letters/quebec-is-not-at-war-with-english/
i'll just paste this in here, idk why

i mean, i posted it for murican+intl ilxors ; don't really want to get into in a language debate with 5 guys.

not at war wit u guys

Unconvincing PR operation by Boisclair.

'Quebecers of all origins are proud of their unique identity'

Sorry, I am not proud of Quebec's identity and I don't think it is particulary unique.

how is it not unique? it's incredibly unique.

^^ I am also curious about this

xposts, I don't know if ppl outside of Canada really have much of a clue about or interest in our language debate to begin with. Sometimes I talk to UK ppl who are ask about Canada's languages and lots seem to assume that we all speak both English and French. One UK friend was surprised when I told her that language is a pretty divisive issue and that a lot of ppl's French knowledge/education is... well, patchy. Like in Cgy/Edm it's mandatory in some schools only from grades 4 to 6 or 7 (and even then I would guess not many of the teachers are actually fluent).

Isn't it no longer mandatory in Calgary?

Maybe that's wrong; can't find a citation with a quick Google search.

i don't think you need it at all out there?!

No, you don't, but some French is still required in almost all school systems afaik. (I seem to remember a news story about Calgary dropping this a few years ago but I could be wrong.)

Yeah, 2011:

http://cjsw.com/program/cjsw-presents/calgary-board-of-education-removes-mandatory-core-french/

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:N_TFMGYW43IJ:www.cpf.bc.ca/site3/attachments/1449_CPF%2520Asks%2520for%2520Reversal%2520of%2520CBE%2520Decision.pdf+calgary+board+of+education+removes+mandatory+core+french+requirement&hl=en&gl=ca&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShVk1W9hoN8KuaC325xl84tq4dtGUt-BR2z6UJ0lEmYhDYhcvcwo4bN1nwKxk4gcPP6tjDJkcenLduHUhSni1yPPi3gceQM3CwuCXVO_WNRFuGweDFFdKMKH6X8tQPEXcw8MM-a&sig=AHIEtbSMr4Bg7LPD5RrZNQyNGkrlI1zT5w

It's mandatory for grades 5 to 8 in BC. But I shouldn't really say anything, because I didn't even grow up in Canada. But I did take French as a kid.

Funny thing is there is an ongoing joke in Vancouver about how the typical Vancouverite wasn't born in Vancouver/Canada, and I know/met many people who were in that situation.

French Immersion schools are jokingly refered to as "White Immersion" amongst more than a few East Vancouver parents. Also known as "that school with no music program or field trips".