Canadian Politics

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Chirac is conservative? On the ballot maybe.

Just because he hates Bush doesn't make him a communist.

He leads the UPM, who are a Gaullist party, which is centre-right.

Type "French Politics" into Google if you don't believe me.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Just because he hates Bush doesn't make him a communist.

No, it doesn't even make him a bad president. But he is a bad president never the less. France is in deep goo with the Islamic world, unless they take a more firm stance, they are going to be forced to do what Blair had to do.
Don't think I'm saying that France has to become conservative to be able to deal with issues the right way, the issue lies in the direction of: Islam conflicts with french liberal politics, and acting like "Oh we're not being open-minded enough to extremists! Sacre Bleu!" is not going to solve their problems. Instead they should deal with the rather simple fact that Islam ExXtreme and Liberals Don't Mix.

And Nurvingiel, what if those extremists are your own citizen's? I wasn't sure if you were referring to Muslim's as citizens or Citizens (meaning non-immigrants) as Muslim.
From what I know, not Muslim's because they're Musilims are bieng deported, but only the known extremist groups. If they are non-immigrant and converted to Islam, I don't know what to say except that I highly doubt that it is a large percentage.

He leads the UPM, who are a Gaullist party, which is centre-right.

Type "French Politics" into Google if you don't believe me.

I will.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by inked

Nurv,

I am worried. Given that Canada has a lot of snow and ice built up, now that a conservative has been elected, will those melt and raise the sea level, inundating coastal cities and killing millions if not billions? And, since many Americans think Prs Bush was responsible for Katrina, what is Canada going to do for the world when this event as a result of Canadian political activity brings about the end of the world as we know it?

LOL Inked. I don't think the Tories will cause our snow to melt.
Woah, woah, woah. Back the pony up. People blame Bush for Katrina? Not for appointing an underqualified incompetent to FEMA, and other actual criticisms, but for causing the hurricane itself?

Originally Posted by inked

Reparations might mess up the Canadian economy - unless ya'll use the backup funds saved from the American military safety net you have been under for a century!

If you guys want to have a giant military, that's your own affair.

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

And Nurvingiel, what if those extremists are your own citizen's? I wasn't sure if you were referring to Muslim's as citizens or Citizens (meaning non-immigrants) as Muslim.
From what I know, not Muslim's because they're Musilims are bieng deported, but only the known extremist groups. If they are non-immigrant and converted to Islam, I don't know what to say except that I highly doubt that it is a large percentage.

To clear up the confusion, I wasn't referring to the extremists religion, I was asking about their nationality. In other words, if those extremists were British citizens (WRT your London bombing comment), where were they being deported to?

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

But he is a bad president never the less.

I never said he wasn't! And probably a crook to boot. I am just confused as to where you get the idea that he is a "liberal".

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Islam conflicts with french liberal politics, and acting like "Oh we're not being open-minded enough to extremists! Sacre Bleu!" is not going to solve their problems. Instead they should deal with the rather simple fact that Islam ExXtreme and Liberals Don't Mix.

Sorry. Je ne comprends pas. It was my impression that the French had banned Muslim headscarves from schools. That doesn't sound too "liberal" to me.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Not for appointing an underqualified incompetent to FEMA, and other actual criticisms, but for causing the hurricane itself?

Snicker. Way to clarify the issue, m'lady.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Snicker. Way to clarify the issue, m'lady.

Why thank you. *bows* Clarity is important!

I really don't want to squash discussion in here, especially the interesting one you guys have going on about French politics, but it doesn't have a lot to do with Canadian politics.

Maybe we need a European politics thread? I hope it would be popular. I wouldn't want to tell you to take your discussion elsewhere, only to have your thread die.

But your discussion did get me thinking about "liberal" and "conservative" and their use in Canadian politics. I think of the two terms generally as liberal being free with things, and conservative being careful with things. For example, money. You can be fiscally conservative or liberal (I guess). It's also commonly applied to social policies.
The Liberals are socially liberal and fiscally conservative.
The Conservatives are socially conservative and fiscally liberal.
The NDP are socially liberal and fiscally liberal.
I'm not really sure what the Bloc Quebecois and the Green Party are up to.

Party names are interesting. You obviously can't boil down complex political policies into a short name, though the Progressive Conservatives did this well when they were around. (They were socially liberal and fiscally conservative.)

[The Gaffer]

Yup, agree that it's confusing. I don't find it all that useful a term, it's just that because Americans use it, and there are mostly Americans on this board, it makes sense to use it.

I like the 2-dimensional scale they use at Political Compass (type it into Google) Social (libertarian-authoritarian) and Economic (left-right). I think we had a thread about this a while back.

PS - Don't bother with the Europolitics thread, no-one will be interested. There is one on the EU if folks are desparate. I just wanted to know where Hector got the idea that Chirac isn't a conservative.

PPS - Political Compass have got a section on the Canadian elections, showing where the parties sit on the 2-dimensional graph.

http://www.digitalronin.f2s.com/poli...canada2005.php

* looks at graph *

GO NDP!!!

* looks at results *

D'OH!

[Nurvingiel]

Interesting! I took the test and wound right where the UK Green party is on this chart. Speaking of UK politics, woah Conservatives and New Labour and yikes BNP!
*waves LibDem flag*

I hope they don't meet the same fate as the NDP. (Not that I can really say anything since I voted Liberal.)

Oh Liberals, why didn't you share your brilliant platform with Canadian voters? I only found out about it by going to our local candidate's office and asking specific questions. How many voters do that!? You guys are lucky you still got a hundred seats.

I realized two other things in the course of my election research. One - somewhere along the line, I stopped caring about all the scandals.

Two, and another reason I voted Liberal, is sustainability. The Liberals reduced our massive defecit to a reasonably-sized one. They are generally regarded as being good for the economy. This means we would (in theory) have a sustainable economy. If we collect more taxes then we spend, we can afford to have long-term social programs that won't be gutted in the next budget. A strong economy lets us support universal, single-tiered health-care, national child care, and other important social programs.

This is a new idea that only occured to me right at the end of the election, so feel free to poke holes in it. I want to see if it stands up to scrutiny.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

I never said he wasn't! And probably a crook to boot. I am just confused as to where you get the idea that he is a "liberal".

I don't care if he calls himself George Washington, but Jacques Chirac is about as conservative as Michael Moore, Goldie Hawn and Maureen Dowd combined. And there's not much conservative juice in them.

Sorry. Je ne comprends pas. It was my impression that the French had banned Muslim headscarves from schools. That doesn't sound too "liberal" to me.

It's called stupidity. Banning headscarves is not really liberal or conservative, but in France's case, it most definitely was a liberal move. It's called anti-religion (in public etc, whatever, it's really all the same.) And here again you should see where Musilims and Liberals don't mix!

Snicker. Way to clarify the issue, m'lady.

Not really. Liberals do of course blame Bush quite directly for the creation of Katrina, wether they know better or not.
We all know FEMA was incompetent, we've accepted that a long time ago, and so did Bush, who accepted all the criticism.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Why thank you. *bows* Clarity is important!

I really don't want to squash discussion in here, especially the interesting one you guys have going on about French politics, but it doesn't have a lot to do with Canadian politics.

Maybe we need a European politics thread? I hope it would be popular. I wouldn't want to tell you to take your discussion elsewhere, only to have your thread die.

But your discussion did get me thinking about "liberal" and "conservative" and their use in Canadian politics. I think of the two terms generally as liberal being free with things, and conservative being careful with things. For example, money. You can be fiscally conservative or liberal (I guess). It's also commonly applied to social policies.
The Liberals are socially liberal and fiscally conservative.
The Conservatives are socially conservative and fiscally liberal.
The NDP are socially liberal and fiscally liberal.
I'm not really sure what the Bloc Quebecois and the Green Party are up to.

Party names are interesting. You obviously can't boil down complex political policies into a short name, though the Progressive Conservatives did this well when they were around. (They were socially liberal and fiscally conservative.)

Very sorry Nurv. I did forget this thread was about Canada.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Interesting! I took the test and wound right where the UK Green party is on this chart. Speaking of UK politics, woah Conservatives and New Labour and yikes BNP!
*waves LibDem flag*

I hope they don't meet the same fate as the NDP. (Not that I can really say anything since I voted Liberal.)

Oh Liberals, why didn't you share your brilliant platform with Canadian voters? I only found out about it by going to our local candidate's office and asking specific questions. How many voters do that!? You guys are lucky you still got a hundred seats.

I realized two other things in the course of my election research. One - somewhere along the line, I stopped caring about all the scandals.

Two, and another reason I voted Liberal, is sustainability. The Liberals reduced our massive defecit to a reasonably-sized one. They are generally regarded as being good for the economy. This means we would (in theory) have a sustainable economy. If we collect more taxes then we spend, we can afford to have long-term social programs that won't be gutted in the next budget. A strong economy lets us support universal, single-tiered health-care, national child care, and other important social programs.

This is a new idea that only occured to me right at the end of the election, so feel free to poke holes in it. I want to see if it stands up to scrutiny.

So for the most part up there, voting is pretty much all about economy, eh?
I only came of age for voting last year, so 08 will be my first. And the two elections I've witnessed have centered on who is more morally corrupt than who etc...well, Bush/Gore in 01 had a lot to do with economy.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

To clear up the confusion, I wasn't referring to the extremists religion, I was asking about their nationality. In other words, if those extremists were British citizens (WRT your London bombing comment), where were they being deported to?

Ok, if they were Musilim immigrants that were then citizens of britain? Out.
If they were brits, in the traditional sense, well, as I said above...I don't think there are many brit converts to Islam

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

So for the most part up there, voting is pretty much all about economy, eh?
I only came of age for voting last year, so 08 will be my first. And the two elections I've witnessed have centered on who is more morally corrupt than who etc...well, Bush/Gore in 01 had a lot to do with economy.

I didn't vote Liberal just because of the economy. My main reason was our candidate has a very long history of a great environmental record and working hard on bahalf of BC. He is well-respected in this riding and has a good deal of integrity.
The economy, gay marriage, student support, and having a decent environmental record were all pretty much tied. I'm not sure which reason I'd put ahead.

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Ok, if they were Musilim immigrants that were then citizens of britain? Out.
If they were brits, in the traditional sense, well, as I said above...I don't think there are many brit converts to Islam

So it's okay to grant someone citizenship (as governments do to immigrants), but revoke it because someone is Muslim?
Or are you just saying that immigrants should generally have less rights than citizens who were born in the country?
edit: I realise my questions are a bit loaded.

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

I don't care if he calls himself George Washington, but Jacques Chirac is about as conservative as Michael Moore, Goldie Hawn and Maureen Dowd combined.

What's your evidence for this? This is a sincere question, as I have no idea of the basis of the statement.

[Nurvingiel]

I love Goldie Hawn! *ahem* Sorry, carry on.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I didn't vote Liberal just because of the economy. My main reason was our candidate has a very long history of a great environmental record and working hard on bahalf of BC. He is well-respected in this riding and has a good deal of integrity.
The economy, gay marriage, student support, and having a decent environmental record were all pretty much tied. I'm not sure which reason I'd put ahead.

So it's okay to grant someone citizenship (as governments do to immigrants), but revoke it because someone is Muslim?
Or are you just saying that immigrants should generally have less rights than citizens who were born in the country?
edit: I realise my questions are a bit loaded.

Oh no you don't Nurvvy. You know that's not what it is or what I meant. Not becuase they're Muslim or immigrant. Because they are problematic extremists (and not ALL of them are). Jailing them would have looked bad too, probably worse, so Blair did the fairest thing he could.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

What's your evidence for this? This is a sincere question, as I have no idea of the basis of the statement.

All right then: first, gay marriage in france, and probably abortion rights, thirdly the way he dealt with the Burning Paris issue. It's not my country, but those are reasons to consider someone liberal, eh? Not very conservative is he? unless you're pinning that term to something that has to do with enviromental conservation, right?
But I suppose in the UK you guys are quite far left, and he looks conservative to you.

[Nurvingiel]

According to the political compass (click on UK 2005), UK political parties are not very left. (Except the Greens and the Liberal Democrats.)

[inked]

No Sharia for Canada ... and while we are at it, nobody else gets any either!

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/na...adf39e&k=61024

What you think of this, Nurv?

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

did any socialist parties do well in the canadian elections?

[Nurvingiel]

Sorry LCOU, our only Socialist parties are fringe parties: the Marxist-Leninist Party and the Communist Party. They won no seats.

Actually, I think I'm confused as to what "socialist" means. We have the NDP, who are quite left leaning and could be called socialist, I think. They did pretty well and won about 30 seats (IIRC). (I posted the right answer back in the thread on election night.)

Originally Posted by inked

No Sharia for Canada ... and while we are at it, nobody else gets any either!

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/n...7adf39e&k=61024

What you think of this, Nurv?

Interesting article Inked. I have only read part of it, as I am out of Mooting time today (spent it all in the Olympics thread ). However, it's an important subject and I'll give it some thought.

I agree with the ruling from what I've read so far. That's my preliminary opinion.

[hectorberlioz]

Doin pretty foo in the Olympics indeed, just behind us last time i checked.

So whats brewing up there politically Nuvvy?