Ranting about quebec: newspark edition!

Sounds exactly like our “Labour” government elected last July. All they’ve done is enacted austerity on economics and authoritarianism in the social sphere (including all that horrific transphobia); in practice they’re more right wing than the last Tory government.

Does Canada even have any high-profile politicians who are actual progressives? Is there a Canadian equivalent of Ocasio-Cortez, Sanders, Warren, or Franken before he was kicked out? And, does the parliamentary system provide any chance at all that such a personage could ever become Prime Minister considering it's not the voters who'd be responsible for putting them into office?

The NDP were supposed to be the progressives... but they did the same thing all the rest of them did: traded morals and ideals for corporate cash. Yes, it can actually happen. No, it's not happening now.

The closest thing we have is Wab Keniw out in manitoba, and he is a LONG way from running federally.

In theory, the NDP are more left-leaning than the Liberals, but nobody voted for the NDP this time because we were all scared of dividing votes and letting the Conservatives win.

Nobody was voting NDP to begin with: rahj meet singh was not popular, and had no charisma, and didn't offer enough viable policy over the other parties to make a dent. He had some good ideas, but they would have never met the moment.

*sigh*

I miss jack layton.

wonko the sane? said:

3.) stoking seperatism in alberta and changing the rules to make it much, much easier to have that seperation referendum. To the point where the first nations issued a statement saying "you all can leave if you want, but it's our ******* land.".

Click to expand...

So I kind of glossed over this at the time, but somebody in a YouTube video brought it up again recently in a way that made it a lot clearer that there'd be a real conflict with the First Nations if the separatists ever actually got their way. As he put it: "I'm looking forward to the day when Alberta separatists find out how much of Alberta they would get. And by looking forward to I mean dreading the white-hot ball of white-supremacist rage that will result from finding out that all of Alberta is treaty land and they wouldn't get jack s**t."

Is there seriously some kind of legal agreement whereby Alberta's existence as anything other than Native land is contingent on it remaining part of Canada? And if so, who exactly has the means and willingness to enforce that?

The canadian federal government. The treaty is technically with them. It would end up being the same conditions as if quebec seperated: but instead of access to the seaway and economic reasons (though I am sure there are plenty of those in alberta.) it's would be the sum total of canadian first nations screaming "do your ******* job" to either get things back to status quo or to clear the squatters off their land.

And I'm sure plenty of them don't want status quo, but want the want the land back so they can actually form their own nation anyway.

So I should be rooting for this, eh?

I'm entirely certain that it would just make the alberta seperatists whinier, while not in any way addressing the issues underlying the movement in the first place.

Hey, my favourite Youtube channel mentioned Quebec history (while deliberately avoiding the Discourse).

Quebec DESPERATELY wanted to be back in france... despite hating france for trading them to the english.

So, surprise news: legault has resigned. A few weeks ago he cleanly said he was going no where.
Now, as cathartic as this news is: This is because he's failed as the party leader and was pushed out by more extreme membership because they were losing voter share to the PQ. So the CAQ's next steps after legault will be EVEN MORE draconian anti-everyone-but-white-uniligual-french-catholic legislation, and honestly? Probably more resignations and a few defections and they continue to flail and fail. They don't understand why they are failing and will thus blindly emulate the leaders in the polls.

Poilievres (finally.) facing his leadership review. Yay!

No obvious other has come forward to replace poilievre if he loses, and there's been an uptick in floor crossings... yay? They're either unprepared for him losing, or he's not going to lose.

Most of the analysis I've seen is split; Either he's done and gone, or he's here to stay. And the evidence we've seen (because the tories since harper don't like talking to the press, or the public. Or each other.) could be interpreted in both ways.

Poilievre lost the election: and tories are usually short sighted enough and petty enough that overall context does not matter. He lost, it's his fault, and they hate losers (despite being losers to a man.). And they don't ******* like poilievre: there has been repeated leaks that he's generally disliked in the party, verbally abusive, generally mean and dismissive of other people. Torie VOTERS like poilievre, cause poilievre convinced them trudeau sucks and then spent years insulting trudeau.

And yet: they're the only viable political party outside the liberals.

I hope he loses: the tories won't have a pathway back to power if he does and they need to convince the public to accept an EVEN MORE EXTREMIST candidate to replace him. They won't self mediate, they won't push back the other way: they can't without losing core elements of their base.

hug: poilievre won his leadership review. 87%.

French minister bloke was being a bit facetious, but I approve of this idea.

I've literally been demanding it since trumps first term.

So apparently Canada just one-upped US birthright citizenship, at least in terms of being born to citizens: