Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next

I find it funny that you consider me right wing cuz I consider Canada to be an essentially socialist country. Am I still a right winger if I don't have a problem with Canada being socialist? You seem to think it's a bad thing.
Now, for some of the socialist policies. Where to start. Payment equalization between provinces, universal child care and child care allowances, government funded housing, worker's comp, universal baby bonus etc etc.
I think yer hung up historically on other socialist states. We have what I call, "soft" socialism. We are still a democracy(well as democratic as an oligarchy can be anyway) but with socialist ideals and ideas. To be sure, it's only been about the last 50 years or so this has happened as Canada was certainly NOT founded on socialist ideals.
To me, socialism doesn't necessarily HAVE to be a distinct form of government, socialism is a refelction of the people's wants and needs. I'm not talking about a "people's government" either where we all supposedly own everything. I mean if we wanna get hung up on semantics one could just as easily claim that republics are decidedly left of centre as well.
Ever heard of the People's Republic of China? My favoutite of course is the USSR. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics On a side note, someone from this site tried to recruit me to join some Republican Canadian group. I wanted none of that
Socialism isn't government. Socialism is one of the machinations of government used to achieve(or try to achieve anyway ) some semblence of making sure everyone is provided for, regardless. Like it or not, all the social programs that underlie government policy in Canada make this a socialist nation. Don't think it does? Try removing just ONE of those social programs and see what the reaction is.
See, I don't see things from the right OR the left necessarily. A good idea is a good idea regardless if it's a Conservative, Liberal, or Dipper that comes up with it. The same is exactly true for bad ideas.
To be honest, I find Canada's form of socialism to be somewhat left of centre for sure, but I'd hardly consider it to be radically left.
Shhh I think hear Mr. Douglas

   

You should have stopped right there. Methinks that anything right of Joe Stalin is a right-winger in your world.

   

And we regress further from any understanding of what socialism truly is. We have Non capitalist areas of policy but trust me when I say that we are far from being a true "socialist" nation.

Sorry but seriously we need to better understand what Socialism is nowadays. Lest we further degrade it's true meaning and ignore all the real dangers it poses.

   

Only a true "right winger" would consider the term "socialist" an insult.

We're more socialist than the US (mind you with the recent government ownership of banks and auto manufacturers........)and less socialist than the UK.

So what? I think Canada got it just about right.

   

Being more socialist (tho not in every case) than the US doesn't make us socialist. If you call Canada socialist, what do you call the former USSR, say, or Cuba now? It's like the term sexual assault - means anything from an unwanted pat to rape, so when people hear the term they automatically assume the worst. It doesn't really have much meaning because it's so broad. Democratic socialism is not socialism, and we're a long ways from democratic socialism in Canada. Especially with Harper at the helm, but also under the Liberals. And certainly when Harper called Canada a socialist country, he wasn't paying us a compliment. Under that rubric, every country in the world is socialist, no libertarian countries at all.

I don't have much use for socialism - ie the autocratic kind or one that tries to make everything state run. I have lots of use for ideas embodied in democratic socialism, but even there it has to be applied in a pragmatic manner. Neocons elevate greed to the ultimate virtue, Socialists/communists act as if greed can be eradicated. Neither is true. Greed is a force that needs to tempered and harnessed. "Everything in moderation, including moderation."

   

I said in an earlier post that she could team up with Glenn Beck and they could both spin their heads around making up nonsense theories about the end of the world like the crazy people they are.



Bill O'Reilly seems to have turned slightly more sane over the past few months. Possibly because he might have realised that they hired a guy from the loony bin to replace him as the craziest person on FOX.

   

Which is good for the rest of the sane world.

   

Wow another wing nut for the right wing.

   

Dude. If you want to win an argument, don't put words in other people's mouths. He didn't say any of those things.

I also think that we have elements of socialism in our economy and in our social make-up. I do not think that is a bad thing, and I am far from anything anyone would call right-wing. If Stephen Harper thinks we are a socialist country, then he is at least partially right about one thing. Otherwise, he's got his head totally screwed on the wrong way.

   

I call those dictatorships. The USSR was communist in name only. Cuba is very socialist, but is also not exactly free. Democratic socialism has nothing to do with either of those entities.





Actually, it has a pretty strict meaning with varying degrees of usage.



Why not? From my understanding of socialism, it is the best, most humanitarian implementation of socialism.

   

So it has a pretty strict meaning but can mean whatever the person using it wants it to? How strict is that? And as I pointed out, but the criteria given on this forum, most countries have some socialist policies, so could be labeled socialist from that pov. Doesn't help make your point much if you call the whole world socialist, does it? Canada is far from a socialist country, in the way the word is commonly understood.

   

The same way that no matter how you build a bridge, or whether you put rails, roads, or both it, it is still a bridge. Socialism has a defined set of terms, but not everyone uses them the same way.



We aren't purely socialist, but we don't intend to be either. There needs to be a balance of ideas in order for progress to happen, so we have to use a diverse set of laws and economic polices, not just one rigid design.

   

Absolutely, which is why I react strongly to people calling Canada socialist. It doesn't leave much room for social programs if you already see us as hard left, with what we have. If we're socialist, what to call the Scandinavian countries? (which still don't define themselves as socialist states, nor are thy by any reasonable interpretation of the term). Can't really think of any states that are further left than them, certainly not China.

   

I suppose joining FOX News and her book tour is her way of "better serving the people of Alaska". That was her reason for quitting, dontcha know, wink, wink.

   

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next