Defeating the Right:Generational Shift?

[E.man]

Contaminated by what happens in the U.S., since we're constantly flooded by every sort of media they have, and ideas stopped trickling over the border decades ago. It's a tsunami now. When you see right-wing ex-cabinet ministers from Harper's time (still known as the Dark Decade) wearing a MAGA hat at a party event, it's not hard to figure out that she belongs to a subgroup of the CPC that loves Trump. The "Freedumb Convoy" is planning another go at what happened last year, as the federal enquiry chugs on as to whether or not the feds should have used the Emergency Act to deal with them earlier this year.

Here in Alberta our premier is certifiably BS!C (can't write that out in full due to inappropriate language rules, but she's absolutely stark-raving NUTS). She's trying to table legislation that gives her the power to refuse to enforce any federal law that she thinks "is bad for Alberta." And she gets to decide if they're "bad." We don't get a say. That's a recipe for having our Charter rights stripped away, since some of them are really inconvenient for a government annoyed at having to treat certain demographics like we're actual people.

Some people are counting the days until the next election (May 2023), but then another person pointed out that even though we have provincial elections scheduled every 4 years, they can legally be called sooner, or as long as 5 years from the previous one. This premier only got in a few weeks ago. She can do a lot of damage by May 2023, never mind putting it off until 2024. I think the streets would be full of protesters if she tried that, though.


Maddy has been duly patted and I told her it came all the way from New Zealand.

Can you start at basics?

All I see here in Oz is Trudeau doing something now and then. Where does he fit left/ right?
Am I correct if I say centre left and that's why you have the maga/ freedumb stirrers?

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

that isn't a simplification, it's an inaccuracy

both actual oppression and race grifting have not been a steady/continuous line from mid 1800s to now. us policy after civil rights movement has been so damaging that it has overcome many of the benefits. us officials don't want to admit that, so they want to blame "legacy of slavery" for trends that switched negative and worsened as a trend after the civil rights movement, not before.

similarly, present us officials talk about "multiracial", but they don't actually mean it. colleges have been allowed to openly discriminate in favor of some minority groups and against others for years, and "multiracial" data is used selectively. consider the maternal deaths statistic that came up during abortion discussion - people actually made claims that the pattern showed "discrimination" against minorities generally, despite that per the evidence that assertion is blatantly false, and it is black americans in particular that suffer in that metric. that's a non-trivial error which points to different potential sources of the problem...either racists are only selectively so, at massive scale, or something else needs to explain the observed data. or not, lets just only count that data when convenient apparently. similarly, discrimination based on race counts differently depending on who is doing it...so much for leftwing "multiracial democracy" then.

Incorrect. Please improve your posts!

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Can you start at basics?

All I see here in Oz is Trudeau doing something now and then. Where does he fit left/ right?
Am I correct if I say centre left and that's why you have the maga/ freedumb stirrers?

Centre left is reasonably accurate.

Why we have the Freedumb idiots is partly Trump and partly the fallout of Stephen Harper no longer having ironclad control over the CPC (Conservative Party of Canada, aka the Reformacons). The Reformacons look south and envy the way Trump just ran roughshod over everyone for four years, and wish they could do that as well. That party was born of the "Unite the Right" movement, and the last few years is evidence of their not being very united (numerous changes in leadership).

The same thing is happening in my province. The United Conservative Party - really the Alberta branch of the Reformacons - is not very united. That's a recipe for disaster with two brand-new leaders, neither of whom know WTH they're doing. Both of them support the convoys, which is to say they basically support domestic terrorism if the protesters are helping to advance their political agenda.

Trudeau just sits back, smiles vapidly, and mumbles something about the economy and the middle class. His father wouldn't have let things get into such a mess.

 

[Arwon]

Can you start at basics?

All I see here in Oz is Trudeau doing something now and then. Where does he fit left/ right?
Am I correct if I say centre left and that's why you have the maga/ freedumb stirrers?

The Canadian Liberals to my eye span very roughly speaking from the right faction of the Labor party to elements of social progressivism like the old Democrats, to the moderate business oriented faction of the Australian Liberal party, the Pyne and Turnbull and Frydenberg types. The party of the urban business elite and of the middle classes.

Unions and the more left labour types tend to be more with the NDP as do a lot of people who would be Greens voters in Australia. Conservatives and some more retrograde business sectors are with the Conservatives.

They're rather unusual in having been a small-l liberal party that became a hegemonic party of government rather than a small party like the German FDP and Northern Irish Alliance, but also becoming that big without becoming nationalist conservatives like Japan and Australia's equivalents.

 

[Senethro]

similarly, present us officials talk about "multiracial", but they don't actually mean it. colleges have been allowed to openly discriminate in favor of some minority groups and against others for years, and "multiracial" data is used selectively. consider the maternal deaths statistic that came up during abortion discussion - people actually made claims that the pattern showed "discrimination" against minorities generally, despite that per the evidence that assertion is blatantly false, and it is black americans in particular that suffer in that metric. that's a non-trivial error which points to different potential sources of the problem...either racists are only selectively so, at massive scale, or something else needs to explain the observed data. or not, lets just only count that data when convenient apparently. similarly, discrimination based on race counts differently depending on who is doing it...so much for leftwing "multiracial democracy" then.

You are definitely arguing against imaginary opponents here, that you are grouping into a single, intentional conspiracy. (see Church of Woke doing the same thing in your previous pose)

A thing being made of multiple components doesn't disprove the presence of one, or even its primacy.

Similarly, the idea that racism stopped with Civil Rights THEREFORE all subsequent policy malfeasance (segregation resistance, zoning and funding shenanigans) or sabotaged policy, or simply failed policy can be laid conveniently at someone elses doorstep is silly.

 

[Angst]

Or, as an ancient proverb put it. If you aren't a communist as a teenager you have no heart. If you are still one after 30 you have no brain.

i've heard this many times, variations of it, in danish too, and it's one of the god damn stupidest phrases in the world.

some of the rest of your post is closer to what's happening. when people get comfortable, they don't want to lose their money. the function is submitting to appeasement, not wisdom.

 

[Senethro]

I do find the brain thing to be an odd reinterpretation of having your security against precarious living held hostage.

 

[Zardnaar]

i've heard this many times, variations of it, in danish too, and it's one of the god damn stupidest phrases in the world.

some of the rest of your post is closer to what's happening. when people get comfortable, they don't want to lose their money. the function is submitting to appeasement, not wisdom.

Not sure if Churchill invented that saying but here's the one who made it famous afaik.

 

[Gorbles]

Not sure if Churchill invented that saying but here's the one who made it famous afaik.

Which is funny, because he was a conservative wartime PM that immediately became super unpopular as soon as the war was done. He also suggested the competing party at the time would need a "Gestapo" to carry out their post-election promises.

 

[Zardnaar]

Which is funny, because he was a conservative wartime PM that immediately became super unpopular as soon as the war was done.

He was fairly useless but had two things going for him.

1. Recognized the threat of Hitler.

2. His quips and quotes.

No Hitler you don't need Churchill.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

school indoctrination has largely done its job/won for the left already. right was too busy hating on dungeons and dragons and being the 90's version of today's woke censorship clowns back in the day to do anything about it.

at college level the % of liberal faculty is comical. unsurprisingly, having people spending more time with liberal faculty from elementary school - college than they do with parents slants more of them liberal, on average. i don't see conservatives making any legit effort to copy the tactic, and even basic legislation gets branded "don't say gay" lol.

to some degree, church of woke beat the right at its own censorship/cancel culture game, buoyed by government having a direct interest in it getting more of a say in what people are taught/believe than church/families. unfortunately, that game is cancer no matter who's winning.

i would be happy to see the 2 party system destroyed, though i'm not excited by what it would unfortunately take to accomplish that. we probably just get more decay until the thing doesn't run any longer, like every other nation in history.

Utterly untethered from reality

He was fairly useless but had two things going for him.

1. Recognized the threat of Hitler.

2. His quips and quotes.

No Hitler you don't need Churchill.

He was also an incredible racist who deliberately caused the deaths of millions of people, for no other reason than because he believed them to be inferior on the basis of their ethnicity

 

[E.man]

Centre left is reasonably accurate.

Why we have the Freedumb idiots is partly Trump and partly the fallout of Stephen Harper no longer having ironclad control over the CPC (Conservative Party of Canada, aka the Reformacons). The Reformacons look south and envy the way Trump just ran roughshod over everyone for four years, and wish they could do that as well. That party was born of the "Unite the Right" movement, and the last few years is evidence of their not being very united (numerous changes in leadership).

The same thing is happening in my province. The United Conservative Party - really the Alberta branch of the Reformacons - is not very united. That's a recipe for disaster with two brand-new leaders, neither of whom know WTH they're doing. Both of them support the convoys, which is to say they basically support domestic terrorism if the protesters are helping to advance their political agenda.

Trudeau just sits back, smiles vapidly, and mumbles something about the economy and the middle class. His father wouldn't have let things get into such a mess.

So Canada doesn't fit into the OP of moving away from an incumbent Right because Trudeau has been there for a while now.

 

[E.man]

The Canadian Liberals to my eye span very roughly speaking from the right faction of the Labor party to elements of social progressivism like the old Democrats, to the moderate business oriented faction of the Australian Liberal party, the Pyne and Turnbull and Frydenberg types. The party of the urban business elite and of the middle classes.

Unions and the more left labour types tend to be more with the NDP as do a lot of people who would be Greens voters in Australia. Conservatives and some more retrograde business sectors are with the Conservatives.

They're rather unusual in having been a small-l liberal party that became a hegemonic party of government rather than a small party like the German FDP and Northern Irish Alliance, but also becoming that big without becoming nationalist conservatives like Japan and Australia's equivalents.

Are you a political analyst or something?

 

[Gorbles]

He was fairly useless but had two things going for him.

1. Recognized the threat of Hitler.

2. His quips and quotes.

No Hitler you don't need Churchill.

Aaaaaaand he and his party got smashed in a decisive swing vote to Labour

That wasn't even generational shift, mind you.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

The Canadian Liberals to my eye span very roughly speaking from the right faction of the Labor party to elements of social progressivism like the old Democrats, to the moderate business oriented faction of the Australian Liberal party, the Pyne and Turnbull and Frydenberg types. The party of the urban business elite and of the middle classes.

Unions and the more left labour types tend to be more with the NDP as do a lot of people who would be Greens voters in Australia. Conservatives and some more retrograde business sectors are with the Conservatives.

They're rather unusual in having been a small-l liberal party that became a hegemonic party of government rather than a small party like the German FDP and Northern Irish Alliance, but also becoming that big without becoming nationalist conservatives like Japan and Australia's equivalents.

The Liberals are more receptive to social change to benefit society. For instance, take Pierre Trudeau's famous statement, made in 1968 when he was still the Justice Minister in Pearson's cabinet: "There is no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation." That was when the sodomy laws were repealed, but it's been very apt as the years have gone by, with same-sex marriage being legalized throughout the country in 2005 (during the time when Paul Martin, another Liberal PM - also Catholic - tabled the legislation).

In most cases the Liberal PMs have managed to leave their personal religious beliefs out of politics. They fumbled over MAID, but at least they made some progress. It's ongoing.

Some of our social programs were first proposed and lobbied for by the NDP and put in by the Liberals (ie. health care). This is why our most productive governments tend to be Liberal minorities (or at least those with a modest majority), propped up by the NDP. The concept of "support our bill or proposal or we'll strongly consider helping defeat your next money bill" (thus triggering an election) is something to be taken seriously.

So Canada doesn't fit into the OP of moving away from an incumbent Right because Trudeau has been there for a while now.

The right wing is in chaos federally, with a brand new leader who doesn't have a clue. Pierre Polievre is derisively known as "PP" and enjoys zero respect outside of the group of people who chose him as the latest CPC leader. That does mean that he could possibly become Prime Minister if his party wins the next election (due in 2025, if Justin doesn't call one sooner or if the government doesn't fall on a non-confidence vote). Of course Polievre isn't guaranteed to still be the leader by then. They've been discarding their leaders at an amazing rate, as the party infighting continues.

 

[Lexicus]

Life converts people into conservatives naturally.

This is just self-serving nonsense. Conservatism has to reproduce itself through ideological hegemony and through propaganda that has had to become increasingly sophisticated as increasing economic complexity has made it more difficult to control the information environment (it was easier when only 1/10th of the population could read).

There is nothing less natural than the brutal hierarchies conservatism seeks to defend and reproduce.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

i've heard this many times, variations of it, in danish too, and it's one of the god damn stupidest phrases in the world.

some of the rest of your post is closer to what's happening. when people get comfortable, they don't want to lose their money. the function is submitting to appeasement, not wisdom.

Is it not wisdom to want to keep hold of the good that you have rather than risk it all? I for one would call gambling most unwise.

 

[Senethro]

Is it not wisdom to want to keep hold of the good that you have rather than risk it all? I for one would call gambling most unwise.

No. Its foolish to submit to the House's games that keep some people living precariously as a threat to the others to not burn down the casino.

 

[Angst]

Is it not wisdom to want to keep hold of the good that you have rather than risk it all? I for one would call gambling most unwise.

i don't find abuse wise.

if it is, i'll rather remain stupid

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Part of growing up is learning that the house always wins. And that rather than fighting windmills you need to stand next to them and collect the loot and XP left over from all the fools that do.

Jokes aside though you both completely missed the point of what I was saying.

The point is that there is a period in ones life, roughly corresponding with the period of young adulthood when the average person is objectively at the worst possible point of what their life is ever going to be in terms of stress.

Children live in what is essentially a golden cage. Sure, things aren't perfect but realistically a child or teenager does not actually have any real life altering struggles to deal with. Being popular in school or having good grades is not even on the same planet as having to actually worry about paying for your own food and clothes or having to worry if you can afford rent this month. To be a child is frankly comparable to being a pet. All you have to worry about is making sure the guy feeding you thinks you are cute.

Older adults are in a similarly decent position. If you played your cards right by the time you reach a certain age you will have already established your self sufficiently that they have a stable position in society and economy. Sure, you might not become rich or famous or what ever other thing people dream of as kids. But you know where they are going, where you can reasonably get and that the worst part is behind you. And hopefully this includes a comfortable or at least reasonably tolerable life style.

But those years in the middle are where you have to work the most and see the least benefit from that work because so much effort has to go into building up for the future. Going to university, internships, entry level jobs, getting married and having go through the starting stages of figuring out how a family is supposed to work and getting your own home all happen in this relatively short period of time for most people. So it's natural that it is in this period that they have the most incentive to try and change the world and the least to loose from gambling on harebrained schemes to do so. Especially once you consider just how much of a shock it is going from the carefree life they had before to suddenly having to work for a living.

At the same time this period overlaps with the time in ones life where one simply does not have enough life experience dealing with the real world to make good decisions. And when you combine those two it's very easy for manipulative sociopathic conman to get them to believe in propaganda and lies and convince them that utopia is just one dead jew, imprisoned communist or purchased NFT away.