Canadian Politics Redux

HughFreakingDillon

I guess it wasn't all bouncy castles after all.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/coutts-blockade-protesters-carbert-parole-request-denied-1.7537628

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

I guess it wasn't all bouncy castles after all.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/coutts-blockade-protesters-carbert-parole-request-denied-1.7537628

Again, there was no link between the Coutts group and the Ottawa group other than common cause.

 The article reads like the offender is behaving themselves and parole was denied moreso because the man is following up with an appeal, which is his legal right, but the parole board interprets only one way.

HughFreakingDillon

there's two of them. one is filing an appeal (which to them, is showing no accountability), which is why they aren't granting him parole. the other just isn't showing he understands the gravity of what he did, even though he's a model prisoner. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

there's two of them. one is filing an appeal (which to them, is showing no accountability), which is why they aren't granting him parole. the other just isn't showing he understands the gravity of what he did, even though he's a model prisoner. 

To their credit, CBC has made their article far clearer and informative than the version I'd read earlier today, which only discussed the one who's appealing.

So they need further thought adjustment, fair enough. I don't necessarily agree with their interpretation of the appeal.

Still don't see a link to the bouncy castles (Ottawa) though, were you claiming they were associated directly?

HughFreakingDillon

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

there's two of them. one is filing an appeal (which to them, is showing no accountability), which is why they aren't granting him parole. the other just isn't showing he understands the gravity of what he did, even though he's a model prisoner. 

To their credit, CBC has made their article far clearer and informative than the version I'd read earlier today, which only discussed the one who's appealing.

So they need further thought adjustment, fair enough. I don't necessarily agree with their interpretation of the appeal.

Still don't see a link to the bouncy castles (Ottawa) though, were you claiming they were associated directly?

no, just in cause, as you mentioned. 

DarthMaeglin

I realize I need to express appreciation for having King Charles read the Throne Speech tomorrow.

My hope is that Carney’s government will be more respectful of the monarchy than the previous administration-that-shall-not-be-named, lol.

Original_Shifty

Fuck the monarchy.

DarthMaeglin

Original_Shifty said:

Fuck the monarchy.

Have to admit, this is pretty much the response I expected, lol.

Original_Shifty

You're welcome.

benjs

DarthMaeglin said:

I realize I need to express appreciation for having King Charles read the Throne Speech tomorrow.

My hope is that Carney’s government will be more respectful of the monarchy than the previous administration-that-shall-not-be-named, lol.

Honest question (since I don't know) - in what way has the current monarchy aided Canada, or is the reverence owed in your eyes purely based on history?

DarthMaeglin

benjs said:

DarthMaeglin said:

I realize I need to express appreciation for having King Charles read the Throne Speech tomorrow.

My hope is that Carney’s government will be more respectful of the monarchy than the previous administration-that-shall-not-be-named, lol.

Honest question (since I don't know) - in what way has the current monarchy aided Canada, or is the reverence owed in your eyes purely based on history?

First, I wouldn’t call it reverence, moreso respect. To begin with, I appreciate tradition and what could be called the “pomp and circumstance” that it entails. Given that Elizabeth (and now Charles it seems) stayed pretty much apolitical, I don’t really have much problem with a figurehead at the top, as we have with our constitutional monarchy.

In addition to that, based on growing up with Queen Elizabeth I do feel that the monarchy can provide an example for us commoners to aspire to, simply in terms of manners and good behaviour, as well as encouraging service to one’s country.

 I fully acknowledge that there’s a lot that goes against what I just said, but that’s (mostly) behind the curtains crap that, for me, ultimately exposes the fact that they’re human beings not deities. I’m talking about what goes on in front of the curtains here.

With all that said, the point of my first post on this was simply me acknowledging something the current government got right (in my eyes) if I’m going to also be critical of them.

HughFreakingDillon

To me the monarchy represents order through oppression and subjugation. Not to mention attempted genocide and invading and taking over nearly every country they wanted. 

They represent everything I came to loathe about how parents expected their children to behave, and generally how society was expected to act. 

You can teach a kid good manners without beating it into them. Same goes for the rest of society. 

Respect those that rose to financial prominence off the backs of others? Considering people are superior because of their bloodline? I suppose is a hallmark of conservatism. BLECH

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

To me the monarchy represents order through oppression and subjugation. Not to mention attempted genocide and invading and taking over nearly every country they wanted. 

They represent everything I came to loathe about how parents expected their children to behave, and generally how society was expected to act. 

You can teach a kid good manners without beating it into them. Same goes for the rest of society. 

Respect those that rose to financial prominence off the backs of others? Considering people are superior because of their bloodline? I suppose is a hallmark of conservatism. BLECH

You’d likely find many monarchists who aren’t a part of your most hated group (Conservatives). And as many Conservatives who don’t support the monarchy. Seriously, give the stereotyping a break, it rarely adds to the discussion. BLECH?

 I didn’t know the monarch went around beating manners into people, not sure where that came from.

 The revisionist history (we didn’t even have the word genocide until the 20th century, after the vast majority of colonialism had concluded) is more harmful than helpful since it doesn’t allow for any nuance or acceptance that it was a different world then, and often uses selective readings of the facts (look at the recent treatment of Henry Dundas).

Fuck, last time I acknowledge the government doing something I agree with, lol.

benjs

DarthMaeglin said:

benjs said:

DarthMaeglin said:

I realize I need to express appreciation for having King Charles read the Throne Speech tomorrow.

My hope is that Carney’s government will be more respectful of the monarchy than the previous administration-that-shall-not-be-named, lol.

Honest question (since I don't know) - in what way has the current monarchy aided Canada, or is the reverence owed in your eyes purely based on history?

First, I wouldn’t call it reverence, moreso respect. To begin with, I appreciate tradition and what could be called the “pomp and circumstance” that it entails. Given that Elizabeth (and now Charles it seems) stayed pretty much apolitical, I don’t really have much problem with a figurehead at the top, as we have with our constitutional monarchy.

In addition to that, based on growing up with Queen Elizabeth I do feel that the monarchy can provide an example for us commoners to aspire to, simply in terms of manners and good behaviour, as well as encouraging service to one’s country.

 I fully acknowledge that there’s a lot that goes against what I just said, but that’s (mostly) behind the curtains crap that, for me, ultimately exposes the fact that they’re human beings not deities. I’m talking about what goes on in front of the curtains here.

With all that said, the point of my first post on this was simply me acknowledging something the current government got right (in my eyes) if I’m going to also be critical of them.

I'm not sure what "pomp and circumstance" entails, nor why that's tradition worth appreciating. 

In terms of 'examples for us commoners', Queen Elizabeth put her privilege to good use, but I don't see why we put her on any higher of a pedestal than, say, Greta Thunberg. That is, I don't see why the monarchy is such an outsized role model compared to plenty of other good ones out there. 

Just my two cents, as someone who still can't comprehend the fuss about British royalty as a Canadian in 2025.

Happy it made you happy though, I guess?

DarthMaeglin

benjs said:

DarthMaeglin said:

benjs said:

DarthMaeglin said:

I realize I need to express appreciation for having King Charles read the Throne Speech tomorrow.

My hope is that Carney’s government will be more respectful of the monarchy than the previous administration-that-shall-not-be-named, lol.

Honest question (since I don't know) - in what way has the current monarchy aided Canada, or is the reverence owed in your eyes purely based on history?

First, I wouldn’t call it reverence, moreso respect. To begin with, I appreciate tradition and what could be called the “pomp and circumstance” that it entails. Given that Elizabeth (and now Charles it seems) stayed pretty much apolitical, I don’t really have much problem with a figurehead at the top, as we have with our constitutional monarchy.

In addition to that, based on growing up with Queen Elizabeth I do feel that the monarchy can provide an example for us commoners to aspire to, simply in terms of manners and good behaviour, as well as encouraging service to one’s country.

 I fully acknowledge that there’s a lot that goes against what I just said, but that’s (mostly) behind the curtains crap that, for me, ultimately exposes the fact that they’re human beings not deities. I’m talking about what goes on in front of the curtains here.

With all that said, the point of my first post on this was simply me acknowledging something the current government got right (in my eyes) if I’m going to also be critical of them.

I'm not sure what "pomp and circumstance" entails, nor why that's tradition worth appreciating. 

In terms of 'examples for us commoners', Queen Elizabeth put her privilege to good use, but I don't see why we put her on any higher of a pedestal than, say, Greta Thunberg. That is, I don't see why the monarchy is such an outsized role model compared to plenty of other good ones out there. 

Just my two cents, as someone who still can't comprehend the fuss about British royalty as a Canadian in 2025.

Happy it made you happy though, I guess?

Fair enough, I understand what you’re saying.

 The “pomp and circumstance”, for me, refers to the rituals that accompany the office. In many ways it provides a sort of rallying point for the public, as seen (much more in England than here) with the weddings, funerals and King Charles’ coronation.

 I get that our (Canadian) relationship is somewhat removed and the age of the paparazzi has done the royals no favours. As well, with so many cultures present, many don’t have any real connection to our King.

It’s always interesting to hear discussions from England about abolishing the monarchy, those discussions usually end when the data is presented about how many tourists and money the royal family draws to the country. Obviously that doesn’t apply to Canada, lol.

Maybe when I was much younger I might have put the royals on some sort of pedestal but I stopped doing that for anyone a long time ago. I’ll respect and even admire people but I stop there, since to be human is to be fallible. As I type this I realize about the only people I might put on a pedestal would be first responders (police, fire, paramedics) or our armed forces who I do see as heroes.

HughFreakingDillon

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

To me the monarchy represents order through oppression and subjugation. Not to mention attempted genocide and invading and taking over nearly every country they wanted. 

They represent everything I came to loathe about how parents expected their children to behave, and generally how society was expected to act. 

You can teach a kid good manners without beating it into them. Same goes for the rest of society. 

Respect those that rose to financial prominence off the backs of others? Considering people are superior because of their bloodline? I suppose is a hallmark of conservatism. BLECH

You’d likely find many monarchists who aren’t a part of your most hated group (Conservatives). And as many Conservatives who don’t support the monarchy. Seriously, give the stereotyping a break, it rarely adds to the discussion. BLECH?

 I didn’t know the monarch went around beating manners into people, not sure where that came from.

 The revisionist history (we didn’t even have the word genocide until the 20th century, after the vast majority of colonialism had concluded) is more harmful than helpful since it doesn’t allow for any nuance or acceptance that it was a different world then, and often uses selective readings of the facts (look at the recent treatment of Henry Dundas).

Fuck, last time I acknowledge the government doing something I agree with, lol.

Absolutely. Sarcasm. Anecdotally, I am close friends with a gay couple whose lives seem to revolve around the royals. Big liberals. Have a picture of themselves with JT in their backyard in their living room. I know, you just threw up in your mouth s little, didn’t you lol. 

I don’t hate conservatives. That’s absurd. I know and love many conservatives. I have a Maple MAGA uncle. I have cousins that are proudly “fuck Trudeau-ers”. So does my wife. They are (mostly) lovely people. I also have liberal family I can’t stand lol. 

Edit to add: I simply don’t relate to the conservative view. I mean, our entire existence is based on progress, not stagnation. And my comment about “hallmark of conservativism” was meant in the vein that conservatives prefer tradition, keeping things the same. 

I just can’t understand reverence for a group that puts itself above others. I don’t care if we didn’t have the language for what they did back then. Same reason the catholic church is evil. No amount of progressive popes can erase their abhorrent past. 

That excuse of “don’t judge past actions by today’s standards” reads like my father’s view on Canada’s treatment of Indigenous. 

Diana was a bright spot in the royal family, and wanted to use her influence for good. Liz hated her for that. And it cost her her life. That’s all I need to know. Tradition trumps good. 

I consider the Royals kinda like The Empire in Star Wars. I’m no jedi, but I certainly ain’t no storm trooper. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

To me the monarchy represents order through oppression and subjugation. Not to mention attempted genocide and invading and taking over nearly every country they wanted. 

They represent everything I came to loathe about how parents expected their children to behave, and generally how society was expected to act. 

You can teach a kid good manners without beating it into them. Same goes for the rest of society. 

Respect those that rose to financial prominence off the backs of others? Considering people are superior because of their bloodline? I suppose is a hallmark of conservatism. BLECH

You’d likely find many monarchists who aren’t a part of your most hated group (Conservatives). And as many Conservatives who don’t support the monarchy. Seriously, give the stereotyping a break, it rarely adds to the discussion. BLECH?

 I didn’t know the monarch went around beating manners into people, not sure where that came from.

 The revisionist history (we didn’t even have the word genocide until the 20th century, after the vast majority of colonialism had concluded) is more harmful than helpful since it doesn’t allow for any nuance or acceptance that it was a different world then, and often uses selective readings of the facts (look at the recent treatment of Henry Dundas).

Fuck, last time I acknowledge the government doing something I agree with, lol.

Absolutely. Sarcasm. Anecdotally, I am close friends with a gay couple whose lives seem to revolve around the royals. Big liberals. Have a picture of themselves with JT in their backyard in their living room. I know, you just threw up in your mouth s little, didn’t you lol. 

I don’t hate conservatives. That’s absurd. I know and love many conservatives. I have a Maple MAGA uncle. I have cousins that are proudly “fuck Trudeau-ers”. So does my wife. They are (mostly) lovely people. I also have liberal family I can’t stand lol. 

Edit to add: I simply don’t relate to the conservative view. I mean, our entire existence is based on progress, not stagnation. And my comment about “hallmark of conservativism” was meant in the vein that conservatives prefer tradition, keeping things the same. 

I just can’t understand reverence for a group that puts itself above others. I don’t care if we didn’t have the language for what they did back then. Same reason the catholic church is evil. No amount of progressive popes can erase their abhorrent past. 

That excuse of “don’t judge past actions by today’s standards” reads like my father’s view on Canada’s treatment of Indigenous. 

Diana was a bright spot in the royal family, and wanted to use her influence for good. Liz hated her for that. And it cost her her life. That’s all I need to know. Tradition trumps good. 

I consider the Royals kinda like The Empire in Star Wars. I’m no jedi, but I certainly ain’t no storm trooper. 

For me the worst thing the Canadian federal conservative party did was drop the word “progressive” because that word has basically been weaponized against them, implying that the party is somehow regressive. If I’m forced to identify myself politically I still call myself a progressive conservative.

Maybe conservatism has more to do with being cautious, not regressive?

Again, respect, not reverence. But this is the crowd that liked Trudeau sticking his tongue out at the photographer when he was retrieving his chair from the House of Commons, fuck what the room represents.

I can’t tell if you believe in one of the theories that Diana was murdered or what, or if you blame the Royals. Maybe you can clarify what exactly you meant.

 I hate this saying but “sorry, not sorry” I will never agree with revisionist history. The only fucking thing that needs pursuing in regards to history is accuracy and perhaps acknowledgement of the progress that has been made. Too bad we won’t be around to see how harshly history judges us.

 The DISinformation that accompanies this revisionist history is the worst part of it. Anecdotally I was watching a show on our provincial tv channel called Truth & Lies, and it claimed to provide a more accurate account of our history. Then, during the segment about residential schools (which gave the strong impression that every single child was abused, full stop) as proof of the atrocities they talked about the recent discovery of “mass graves”, which we know isn’t true, and that many of those first 215 will likely turn out to be not human remains. If the excavation ever starts.

Again, for false reading of the record I point to Henry Dundas and Sankofa Square. They took his name off the square after he was grossly misrepresented. Then the name Sankofa was chosen (with no real public input), a word that has a nice meaning but comes from an African country that was known for selling other tribes into slavery. Ooops?

 I very strongly feel I don’t have the moral right to judge people from history the same way I won’t judge the panhandler on the street. They were people of the time they lived in and that I will never (mostly thankfully) experience. Maybe that’s a perspective that hasn’t really been considered?

Alternatively, humans may find in the future that conformity does ensure the survival of the species and therefore the individualism that we hold so precious will be seen as evil. What then? Join the (from a certain point of view) Rebel Alliance I suppose, lol.

static111

Halifax2TheMax

static111 said:

What a fucking clown. But watch out, you can’t survive without the US.

PJ_Soul

As far as the Royals and Canada are concerned.... everytime I see all that crap with the ceremony and costumes, etc, I think about how totally ridiculous it is, and what a waste of money. However, it probably earns a lot more from tourism dollars in England than it costs, so okay. For Canada, I think it is beneficial for us to be a member of the commonwealth, even on an individual level. There are real benefits to each of us if we're talking about travelling ro other commonwealth countries. As far the while connection of our government to the Crown... well, it's pretty useless, really, at least of you're not attached to some nebulous idea of the tradition of it. Diplomatically... hmmm. I think that is probably up for debate into infinity. I mean, obviously it's a good thing to be a 100% solid ally of the UK, but i am not sure that would be any different if the Crown went away at this point. Symbolically... Trump doesn't give a flying fuck, that's for sure. But what that means, I am not sure.

I watched that new Netflix documentary about the hunt for Osama Bin Laden yesterday. I made me realize how fucking much I miss Obama. Omg. Totally different world.