Vigilans
Orgasm Donor
Joined: Jun 20, 2008
Age: 24
Posts: 12091
Location: La belle province
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:53 am Post subject: Re: Lack of traction of Canada-centric Threads |
 |
|
| CrazyCatLord wrote: | | Master_Pedant wrote: | | It seems that a lot of PPR's Canadian based issue threads fall, with few views, pretty quickly. It might have something to do with the low amount of Canadians on this sub-forum coupled by the fact that a lot of people seem to think it's morally wrong to have an opinion about public issues in other countries. What are other potential causes? |
I think most European WP members are quite well informed about US politics. There isn't much global interest in Canadian politics though. They don't have the same entertainment factor  |
Partially because American "politics" are entertainment industry first and politics second 
_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do |
|
| Back to top |
|
Billybones
Snowy Owl
Joined: Jan 28, 2012
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2012 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As an American who has frequently visited Canada, I can say that I wish American politics could be more like Canada's - a fluid, multiparty system rather than the sclerotic duopoly that we have. For my part, I would welcome the chance to vote for a truly relevant left-leaning party.
On the other hand, the Westminster parliamentary system has always seemed undemocratic in that the party in power can call an election whenever it chooses; also that, without the separation of powers in a presidential system, the majority party can pretty much do whatever it pleases, checked only by public opinion. (I know there has been talk about going to regularly scheduled elections. Did that ever happen?)
It has always seemed perplexing to me that Canada can be so progressive about matters like secularism, minority & indigenous rights, & universal health care, but be so defiantly retrograde on addressing climate change & environmental protection, though I think this might be a consequence of having an economy based largely on resource extraction.
The two major things I've noticed about politics in Canada, in comparison to the U.S.: 1) power is much more decentralized - provincial elections matter in a way that U.S. state elections usually don't; 2) politics is more parochial - not so much about left/right ideology as it is about delivering the goods.
Canadians, please feel free to correct me if you disagree with any of this. I don't know what it's like to live there, only that it's a wonderful place to visit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
AstroGeek
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 29, 2011
Age: 19
Posts: 1477
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Billybones wrote: | As an American who has frequently visited Canada, I can say that I wish American politics could be more like Canada's - a fluid, multiparty system rather than the sclerotic duopoly that we have. For my part, I would welcome the chance to vote for a truly relevant left-leaning party.
On the other hand, the Westminster parliamentary system has always seemed undemocratic in that the party in power can call an election whenever it chooses; also that, without the separation of powers in a presidential system, the majority party can pretty much do whatever it pleases, checked only by public opinion. (I know there has been talk about going to regularly scheduled elections. Did that ever happen?)
It has always seemed perplexing to me that Canada can be so progressive about matters like secularism, minority & indigenous rights, & universal health care, but be so defiantly retrograde on addressing climate change & environmental protection, though I think this might be a consequence of having an economy based largely on resource extraction.
The two major things I've noticed about politics in Canada, in comparison to the U.S.: 1) power is much more decentralized - provincial elections matter in a way that U.S. state elections usually don't; 2) politics is more parochial - not so much about left/right ideology as it is about delivering the goods.
Canadians, please feel free to correct me if you disagree with any of this. I don't know what it's like to live there, only that it's a wonderful place to visit. |
There are certainly problems with the Westminster system. There was talk of fixed election dates, but our Prime Minister broke his own law and called one anyway. So much for that... And yes, majority governments have WAY too much power. I don't think that this one even really cares about public opinion. It just does what it wants. And we lack proportional representation (a problem that we share with the USA).
There is some truth to your analysis of why we're so environmentally useless. I'll link you to an interesting take on it by the leader of our Green Party: Top Environmental Leader Questions Canada's Green Reputation. Part of the problem is the party in power--to be honest, any of the others would be at least somewhat better.
There may be less of the left-right ideology, but we have far too much partisanship. Even the opposition parties can't seem to cooperate much on anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
TM
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 04, 2012
Posts: 2122
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2012 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I have no knowledge of Canadian politics except that Stephen Harper apparently is a bit of a dick. I'm just here to give appreciation for the wordplay in the title. |
|
| Back to top |
|
donnie_darko
Phoenix
Joined: Nov 27, 2009
Age: 23
Posts: 1794
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
You guys know nothing aboot Canada.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
Vigilans
Orgasm Donor
Joined: Jun 20, 2008
Age: 24
Posts: 12091
Location: La belle province
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| donnie_darko wrote: | | You guys know nothing aboot Canada. |
Reeallllyyyy
_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do |
|
| Back to top |
|
visagrunt
Polymath
Joined: Oct 17, 2009
Age: 45
Posts: 5754
Location: Vancouver, BC
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AstroGeek wrote: | | There are certainly problems with the Westminster system. There was talk of fixed election dates, but our Prime Minister broke his own law and called one anyway. So much for that... And yes, majority governments have WAY too much power. I don't think that this one even really cares about public opinion. It just does what it wants. And we lack proportional representation (a problem that we share with the USA). |
Well, in fairness, he didn't break his own law, because the very first thing that his fixed election date legislation said was, "Nothing in this section affects the powers of the Governor General, including the power to dissolve Parliament at the Governor General’s discretion."
So while the Prime Minister violated the spirit of a fixed elections date law, he couldn't break the actual law, because to make a law that sets fixed dates a Constitutional amendment with unanimous consent of the provinces (since it would touch on the powers of the Crown). And our Prime Minister is demonstrably unwilling to sit down with the Premiers on any subject--not least of which is the Constitution.
| Quote: | There is some truth to your analysis of why we're so environmentally useless. I'll link you to an interesting take on it by the leader of our Green Party: Top Environmental Leader Questions Canada's Green Reputation. Part of the problem is the party in power--to be honest, any of the others would be at least somewhat better.
There may be less of the left-right ideology, but we have far too much partisanship. Even the opposition parties can't seem to cooperate much on anything. |
Well one of the significant crisis decisions is do we want to have a polarized system in which the Liberals are reduced to ash? This is clearly the Conservative's preferred approach, since they believe that in a two-way contest with the NDP, they will become the natural governing party of Canada.
Or do we want a centrist system in which Liberal governments are the norm, with Conservative interludes while the Liberals are periodically sent to the woodshed? This is clearly the Liberal's preference.
The next election will tell the tale. Can the NDP hold on to its gains in Québec, or were these a Jack induced one-off? If the Conservatives and the NDP succeed in putting the squeeze on the Liberals, then we are in for two party rule for a long time. On the other hand, if the NDP falls back to third party status, then we may well see a reversion to more typical electoral patterns.
But neither the Liberals nor the NDP are going to concede ground until it is clear which way the electorate are going to go in 2015.
_________________
--James |
|
| Back to top |
|
AstroGeek
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 29, 2011
Age: 19
Posts: 1477
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visagrunt wrote: | | Quote: | | There may be less of the left-right ideology, but we have far too much partisanship. Even the opposition parties can't seem to cooperate much on anything. |
Well one of the significant crisis decisions is do we want to have a polarized system in which the Liberals are reduced to ash? This is clearly the Conservative's preferred approach, since they believe that in a two-way contest with the NDP, they will become the natural governing party of Canada.
Or do we want a centrist system in which Liberal governments are the norm, with Conservative interludes while the Liberals are periodically sent to the woodshed? This is clearly the Liberal's preference.
The next election will tell the tale. Can the NDP hold on to its gains in Québec, or were these a Jack induced one-off? If the Conservatives and the NDP succeed in putting the squeeze on the Liberals, then we are in for two party rule for a long time. On the other hand, if the NDP falls back to third party status, then we may well see a reversion to more typical electoral patterns.
But neither the Liberals nor the NDP are going to concede ground until it is clear which way the electorate are going to go in 2015. |
I personally really hope Nathan Cullen wins the NDP leadership. The opposition parties need to start cooperating and he's the only one who wants to do that. Unfortunately he doesn't seem to be doing so well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Douglas_MacNeill
What's next beyond "Phoenix?"
Joined: May 11, 2007
Age: 49
Posts: 1288
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| donnie_darko wrote: | | You guys know nothing aboot Canada. |
Acutally I pronounce about to rhyme with devout or even pout. The vowels in the Canadian dialect of English may yet be short enough that the ow of about doesn't clearly emerge or isn't clearly enunciated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
visagrunt
Polymath
Joined: Oct 17, 2009
Age: 45
Posts: 5754
Location: Vancouver, BC
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AstroGeek wrote: | | I personally really hope Nathan Cullen wins the NDP leadership. The opposition parties need to start cooperating and he's the only one who wants to do that. Unfortunately he doesn't seem to be doing so well. |
I am one of those heretics who believes that such an approach is doomed to fail.
What would a united Left party look like? Would it be a labour dominated successor to the NDP? If so, a large number of liberals would flock to the Conservative banner, and undo the Western tilt of its base. Would be a new centrist replacement for the Liberals? Most NDP voters that I know would abandon such a party in a heartbeat, likely splitting off a successor the the NDP in any event.
If, on the other hand, the parties don't merge, then where are we? In my riding we had a Liberal incumbent who lost to an NDP candidate--the Conservative was never in the running. So which party ought to have held the banner? In theory it would have been the Liberal incumbent, but should NDP voters have been foreclosed? If I am faced next time with a choice between my incumbent NDP MP, and a Conservative canadidate, I would think long and hard about whether the best vote would be a spoiled ballot. I am not going to vote NDP simply because they are the not-Conservative option, and I would not expect an NDP supporter to vote Liberal on that basis either.
At the end of the day, it's undemocratic. Voters will grow tired of the Conservatives--as they grow tired with every government, in time. At the next election, we shall see how formerly Conservative voters shift.
_________________
--James |
|
| Back to top |
|
donnie_darko
Phoenix
Joined: Nov 27, 2009
Age: 23
Posts: 1794
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Douglas_MacNeill wrote: | | donnie_darko wrote: | | You guys know nothing aboot Canada. |
Acutally I pronounce about to rhyme with devout or even pout. The vowels in the Canadian dialect of English may yet be short enough that the ow of about doesn't clearly emerge or isn't clearly enunciated. |
Yeah I know Canadians don't really say it that way, unless they're Newfie, I was just making a dumb joke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
AstroGeek
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 29, 2011
Age: 19
Posts: 1477
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visagrunt wrote: | | AstroGeek wrote: | | I personally really hope Nathan Cullen wins the NDP leadership. The opposition parties need to start cooperating and he's the only one who wants to do that. Unfortunately he doesn't seem to be doing so well. |
I am one of those heretics who believes that such an approach is doomed to fail.
What would a united Left party look like? Would it be a labour dominated successor to the NDP? If so, a large number of liberals would flock to the Conservative banner, and undo the Western tilt of its base. Would be a new centrist replacement for the Liberals? Most NDP voters that I know would abandon such a party in a heartbeat, likely splitting off a successor the the NDP in any event.
If, on the other hand, the parties don't merge, then where are we? In my riding we had a Liberal incumbent who lost to an NDP candidate--the Conservative was never in the running. So which party ought to have held the banner? In theory it would have been the Liberal incumbent, but should NDP voters have been foreclosed? If I am faced next time with a choice between my incumbent NDP MP, and a Conservative canadidate, I would think long and hard about whether the best vote would be a spoiled ballot. I am not going to vote NDP simply because they are the not-Conservative option, and I would not expect an NDP supporter to vote Liberal on that basis either.
At the end of the day, it's undemocratic. Voters will grow tired of the Conservatives--as they grow tired with every government, in time. At the next election, we shall see how formerly Conservative voters shift. |
Well, to be honest I think that any form of first-past-the-post is undemocratic. It's merely a question of which form the "undemocracy" takes. I do understand what you are saying though. In the next election I'll have an interesting decision as someone who would be best represented by the Greens but knows they don't have a hope of winning in most ridings. So I'll have to decide whether to vote strategically or vote based on what I believe in.
But in any case, what Nathen Cullen is proposing isn't quite like either of what you have suggested (by the way, I fully agree with your statements with regards to a Liberal-NDP merger). He was suggesting that in ridings with a Conservative incumbant, and only those ridings, would the NDP and Liberals (and maybe Greens) run joint candidates. More importantly, he prioritizes the implementation of proportional representation, which would effectively prevent the Conservatives (or anyone else, most likely) from ever getting another majority. Some people might view that as a bad thing, but I think it will lead to more cooperation, better representation, and should prevent the way one government brings something in and the next gets rid of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
visagrunt
Polymath
Joined: Oct 17, 2009
Age: 45
Posts: 5754
Location: Vancouver, BC
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AstroGeek wrote: | Well, to be honest I think that any form of first-past-the-post is undemocratic. It's merely a question of which form the "undemocracy" takes. I do understand what you are saying though. In the next election I'll have an interesting decision as someone who would be best represented by the Greens but knows they don't have a hope of winning in most ridings. So I'll have to decide whether to vote strategically or vote based on what I believe in.
But in any case, what Nathen Cullen is proposing isn't quite like either of what you have suggested (by the way, I fully agree with your statements with regards to a Liberal-NDP merger). He was suggesting that in ridings with a Conservative incumbant, and only those ridings, would the NDP and Liberals (and maybe Greens) run joint candidates. More importantly, he prioritizes the implementation of proportional representation, which would effectively prevent the Conservatives (or anyone else, most likely) from ever getting another majority. Some people might view that as a bad thing, but I think it will lead to more cooperation, better representation, and should prevent the way one government brings something in and the next gets rid of it. |
But the "co-operate in Conservative ridings" still creates the scenario where probably half of Liberal and NDP supporters are going to be faced with only one of those two options. I certainly agree that FPTP is flawed, but gaming the system because you can't change it is not the way forward.
As for ditching FPTP, I think you'll see the Second Coming (tm) first. Electoral reform has failed in every province where it has been tried on for size--and it failed even worse the second time around here in BC. Cullen might believe in proportional representation--but you can be sure that if he wins, the party machine will move him off that particular policy plank. None of the established parties, other than the Greens, have any interest in messing with FPTP. No Leader of the Opposition can waste political capital on a horse that won't run.
_________________
--James |
|
| Back to top |
|
AstroGeek
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 29, 2011
Age: 19
Posts: 1477
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visagrunt wrote: | | AstroGeek wrote: | Well, to be honest I think that any form of first-past-the-post is undemocratic. It's merely a question of which form the "undemocracy" takes. I do understand what you are saying though. In the next election I'll have an interesting decision as someone who would be best represented by the Greens but knows they don't have a hope of winning in most ridings. So I'll have to decide whether to vote strategically or vote based on what I believe in.
But in any case, what Nathen Cullen is proposing isn't quite like either of what you have suggested (by the way, I fully agree with your statements with regards to a Liberal-NDP merger). He was suggesting that in ridings with a Conservative incumbant, and only those ridings, would the NDP and Liberals (and maybe Greens) run joint candidates. More importantly, he prioritizes the implementation of proportional representation, which would effectively prevent the Conservatives (or anyone else, most likely) from ever getting another majority. Some people might view that as a bad thing, but I think it will lead to more cooperation, better representation, and should prevent the way one government brings something in and the next gets rid of it. |
But the "co-operate in Conservative ridings" still creates the scenario where probably half of Liberal and NDP supporters are going to be faced with only one of those two options. I certainly agree that FPTP is flawed, but gaming the system because you can't change it is not the way forward.
As for ditching FPTP, I think you'll see the Second Coming (tm) first. Electoral reform has failed in every province where it has been tried on for size--and it failed even worse the second time around here in BC. Cullen might believe in proportional representation--but you can be sure that if he wins, the party machine will move him off that particular policy plank. None of the established parties, other than the Greens, have any interest in messing with FPTP. No Leader of the Opposition can waste political capital on a horse that won't run. |
Ah well, I guess I'm just young and idealistic and continue hold onto the (possibly idiotic) hope that one days things will change for the better.
Also, I suppose I'm not in the best position to evaluate the whether Liberal and NDP voters could cooperate, considering that for me any vote will be a compromise (as you could probably figure out from my suggestions of how I'd run Canada). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
