Quiz - which Canadian political party most closely matches your views?

[Vile Atheist]

Liberals are the centrist party (raging leftists compared to both US parties). The Bloc is the french nationalist party. They're pretty much centrists as well. Greens are leftists on environmental issues, but have been having trouble carving out an identity for themselves apart from environmentalism. They're to the left of Liberal / Bloc.

Of the other two parties, Conservatives are right-wing and NDP is socialist.

Conservatives are still pretty centrist, actually.

 

[Alceste]

Conservatives are still pretty centrist, actually.

At the moment, with a minority, yes, I suppose I would agree with that - they can't go too far. But Harper himself thinks the American neo-cons are "a light and an inspiration".

 

[Vile Atheist]

At the moment, with a minority, yes, I suppose I would agree with that - they can't go too far. But Harper himself thinks the American neo-cons are "a light and an inspiration".

However Ignatieff's political views are quite akin to Harper's. So it doesn't make sense to call the Liberals centrist and the Conservatives right when their leaders have an interventionist policy (something distinctly neo-con). Both Ignatieff and Harper prefer intervention. I see them as pretty much the same, really, but just pandering to different crowds. A turd is still a turd, no matter how you dress it up.

And Harper may or may not believe the American neo-cons are a light and inspiration, but it's certainly better than living in America for a lot of his life and pretending to be American, don't you think?

 

[Alceste]

A turd is still a turd, no matter how you dress it up.

Amen, brother! I actually don't know much about Ignatieff. I've been out of the country. The liberals under Chretien were the only ones I knew anything about, really. I know they shifted right under Martin, but since Harper took the reins I don't know what they've been doing.

And Harper may or may not believe the American neo-cons are a light and inspiration, but it's certainly better than living in America for a lot of his life and pretending to be American, don't you think?

Who did that? Ignatieff? I'm not a fan of the Liberals myself. I do think they're to the left of the Conservatives, but not by much. I'm NDP all the way. (Although I'm keeping my eye on the Pirate Party).

 

[Vile Atheist]

Amen, brother! I actually don't know much about Ignatieff. I've been out of the country. The liberals under Chretien were the only ones I knew anything about, really. I know they shifted right under Martin, but since Harper took the reins I don't know what they've been doing.

Beyond raising taxes and cutting military spending? Nothing.

Who did that? Ignatieff? I'm not a fan of the Liberals myself. I do think they're to the left of the Conservatives, but not by much. I'm NDP all the way. (Although I'm keeping my eye on the Pirate Party).

I would like the NDP a lot more if they had any idea how an economy runs.

 

[Alceste]

Beyond raising taxes and cutting military spending? Nothing.

How can they be doing that when they're not in charge any more?

I would like the NDP a lot more if they had any idea how an economy runs.

Well, see I don't believe in the economy, so they work well for me.

 

[Vile Atheist]

How can they be doing that when they're not in charge any more?

I meant that's all they ever do when they're in power. Nowadays, they just agree with pretty much everything the Conservatives propose, threaten elections every 5 minutes, but never actually follow up on their threats because they are spineless.

Personally, I think a more socially liberal Conservative minority government would be great for this country.

Well, see I don't believe in the economy, so they work well for me.

*Utter confusion* Huh? Elaborate please lol?

 

[Alceste]

I meant that's all they ever do when they're in power. Nowadays, they just agree with pretty much everything the Conservatives propose, threaten elections every 5 minutes, but never actually follow up on their threats because they are spineless.

Personally, I think a more socially liberal Conservative minority government would be great for this country.

Yeah, they are pretty spineless, I have to admit. That's the danger of always trying to aim for the exact center of the political spectrum, going whichever way the political wind is blowing and having no fixed ideals - makes you look very wishy-washy.

I just don't trust Harper. He keeps all his MPs mouths zipped too tight, and keeps pretty strict control of the information coming out of the gov't these days. I don't know what they stand for, or what they're like. If they got rid of him and let their MPs speak once in a while, I might give them a look-in. But certainly not while they're chomping at the bit about gay marriage, and not while they're looking likely to hop on board with every American empire-building exercise, no matter how ill-conceived (again, maybe just a Harper thing).

*Utter confusion* Huh? Elaborate please lol?

I believe it's pure fantasy that an economy can exponentially grow forever. I would prefer a sustainable economy - zero-growth. And I prefer stronger local economies to the global economy. So, when the global economy is cracking around the edges, I perceive it as an opportunity to re-localize, and I get all excited. unk:

 

[Vile Atheist]

I just don't trust Harper. He keeps all his MPs mouths zipped too tight, and keeps pretty strict control of the information coming out of the gov't these days. I don't know what they stand for, or what they're like. If they got rid of him and let their MPs speak once in a while, I might give them a look-in. But certainly not while they're chomping at the bit about gay marriage, and not while they're looking likely to hop on board with every American empire-building exercise, no matter how ill-conceived (again, maybe just a Harper thing).

The NDPs do the same. Especially in my area (Northern Ontario) where it's all NDP. Layton silenced our MP Bruce Hyer (NDP) over the long gun registry issue. I don't like the NDP so much, but I admit I do like Hyer. He's actually thinking of the people and not just following his party, hoping to suckle the teet of power.

He makes a good effort to communicate with the constituents. And he has some good ideas on tourism for this dying region. I don't mind being represented by an NDP MP. But I definitely would not want them in power on the provincial or federal levels.

And I don't really understand why people who have so much against Harper call him some American puppet. You realize he's actually fighting the US vigorously over the sovereignty of the Northwest Passage/Canadian waters?

It's unfortunate that so many in this country confuse Canadian nationalism with anti-Americanism (not accusing you of it). Any attempt at a stronger tie with our largest military ally and trading partner is perceived as kissing up to them. I agree we should fight the tide of American political influence in our country. But I don't agree we should alienate the United States in the name of a Canadian identity.

I just find it quite hilarious that some Liberals I know go on and on and on about Harper being an "American Bush puppet", and yet they proudly put Obama's campaign signs on their front lawn. Yes, they advertised (and still do, by the way) a political party they cannot vote for and whose policies are even more right-wing than Harper's. But Harper and "his ilk" are obviously the ones pandering to big-daddy USA, right? Harper is the neo-con, even though they evidently support a further right-wing party, of course. A foreign political party at that. Hypocrisy knows no limit in Canada.

I guess it's fine when Canadian Liberals idolize the Democratic Party, but not when Harper makes treaties that make capture of fugitives who get across the border easier, or protecting both our countries' citizens in the event of a natural disaster. These were decried by the left as a violation of our sovereignty and they thought the US army would camp right outside Ottawa...just go to CBC.ca and look at the comment boards for any story and you'll see what I mean...Many facepalms there lol.

Hey, there's plenty I don't like about Harper (his opposition to gay marriage is one of the biggies). But he does have good points and he's definitely the strongest leader any party is offering at the moment.

Harper revitalized our military after years and years of neglect when the Liberals were in power. He's made closer ties with the US a priority. He actually has the cojones to condemn China's human rights abuses. He's trying to give us tax cuts. He inherited a sticky situation in Afghanistan from the Liberals and turned it into one where our troops would have the equipment and training to come home alive. The Liberals sent a few hundred of our boys to Afghanistan with cap guns.

But I would like to see more transparency in him and greater accountability. And despite him being devoutly religious, he mostly keeps his religion out of his politics, which I can respect. But that being said, his religious views do influence what his social policies will be and that's unavoidable for anyone. I would like to see a reversal on the gay marriage issue.


As an aside, I would like to see the NDP in power if only they can successfully implement a system where all post-secondary education (college/university/trade school) is paid for by the government without completely screwing over the economy. I believe that was on their platform. I could be mistaken on that, though. Sometimes I have socialist conniptions.

I just think Harper gets unfairly blamed for everything from global warming to the lack of adhesiveness of stamps. Most of what the guy gets blamed for, he inherited from Liberals. The medical isotope crisis, for example. Of course he has made mistakes but not nearly as many as his opponents are trying to paint it as.

Just my two cents on him. He's okay.

 

[Alceste]

Thanks for your thoughts, Maximus. I'm surprised to hear people were putting Obama signs on their lawns in Ontario. That's weird. I've never talked to anyone who has not been of the opinion that both US mainstream parties are far to the right of anything we have in Canada, including Obama. The most exciting thing about him, for me, was that he ISN'T Bush. Practically anybody would have been an improvement.

My views are very simple in comparison to yours, I think: I don't trust Harper because he supported Canadian participation in the war in Iraq - in fact he delivered the exact same speech John Howard delivered a couple days earlier to persuade Australia to hop on board. I find the story of how that came to pass implausible. I don't trust him because of his term as director of the National Citizen's Coalition, which stands for nearly every ideological position I personally despise - non-transparency, privatization of everything including health care, prioritizing tax cuts over balanced budgets, lobbying, the removal of limits on campaign spending by non-party organizations, the reversal of gains made by feminism, collective bargaining units... I find them ethically and morally repugnant, and that's where Harper cut his teeth. So I've dismissed him as a trustworthy person. There's almost nothing he could do to gain my trust, short of strictly adhering to the FOI act - without rerouting all public requests for information through his press office, and removing the gag on all his MPs.

With respect to "anti-Americanism", I think that particularly during the past decade our ties with a country increasingly out of step with the rest of the world, and ill-prepared for immediate and catastrophic problems like global warming and peak oil, and who have a distinct tendency to bomb the crap out of things, is a legitimate concern. I do not want to be tied to the American economic strategy, because it is failing. I don't want to build closer military alliances because they wage un-necessary wars and Canada can not support the expense. I'm happy to trade, but I don't want the trading to take the form of American corporations draining Canada of our natural resources AND the profits that are gained by their liquidation.

"Anti-American" is a meaningless term. Coined by Americans for the purpose of dismissing legitimate international criticism without addressing the points raised. IMO, Canadians shouldn't be using it, and wouldn't be if we weren't exposed to so much US media.

 

[Vile Atheist]

Thanks for your thoughts, Maximus. I'm surprised to hear people were putting Obama signs on their lawns in Ontario. That's weird. I've never talked to anyone who has not been of the opinion that both US mainstream parties are far to the right of anything we have in Canada, including Obama. The most exciting thing about him, for me, was that he ISN'T Bush. Practically anybody would have been an improvement.

And at that in NDP territory. I even had a Conservative friend of mine put an Obama sign up. That makes a little more sense as the Democrats and Conservatives have a similar ideology. But I still called him an idiot for it lol.

My views are very simple in comparison to yours, I think: I don't trust Harper because he supported Canadian participation in the war in Iraq - in fact he delivered the exact same speech John Howard delivered a couple days earlier to persuade Australia to hop on board. I find the story of how that came to pass implausible.

I would oppose his support for the war in Iraq if the purpose was not to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Any other justification is not a great enough excuse to warrant a war on Iraq. That's just my opinion, though. So long as the rationale was humanitarian/to remove a dictator, I'm fine with it.

I don't trust him because of his term as director of the National Citizen's Coalition, which stands for nearly every ideological position I personally despise - non-transparency, privatization of everything including health care, prioritizing tax cuts over balanced budgets, lobbying, the removal of limits on campaign spending by non-party organizations, the reversal of gains made by feminism, collective bargaining units... I find them ethically and morally repugnant, and that's where Harper cut his teeth.

I was actually unaware he was director of the National Citizen's Coalition. I'll have to find more information on that. But if what you say is true, then I agree with you.

So I've dismissed him as a trustworthy person. There's almost nothing he could do to gain my trust, short of strictly adhering to the FOI act - without rerouting all public requests for information through his press office, and removing the gag on all his MPs.

All parties are guilty of gagging MPs. This isn't uniquely Conservative or Harper-based. But again, with the above, if it is true, then I share your sentiments.

With respect to "anti-Americanism", I think that particularly during the past decade our ties with a country increasingly out of step with the rest of the world, and ill-prepared for immediate and catastrophic problems like global warming and peak oil, and who have a distinct tendency to bomb the crap out of things, is a legitimate concern. I do not want to be tied to the American economic strategy, because it is failing. I don't want to build closer military alliances because they wage un-necessary wars and Canada can not support the expense. I'm happy to trade, but I don't want the trading to take the form of American corporations draining Canada of our natural resources AND the profits that are gained by their liquidation.

Military alliances are exactly what keeps Canada a country. The Russians frequently send planes and subs through our airspace and waters in the Arctic. In the event of a Russian invasion, who do you expect to intervene on Canada's behalf? NATO? You think the Norwegians sending five soldiers (with the condition they are not used for combat) is going to help? Because that's exactly what is happening in Afghanistan right now.

As much as I hate to admit it, we need the United States. There is no reason why we cannot remain close allies with them and at the same time not be involved in their global crusades. We can - and do - condemn their actions. The damage Bush did to the United States is incalculable. We need to get past the prejudice that most Americans are slack-jaw, fundamentalist Christians who are hellbent on nuking everything like Yosemite Sam on crack and see that a good portion do have views that can be considered compatible with Canadian ideals.



But I don't understand how you can claim the American economic strategy is failing and then say something like "I'm happy to trade, but I don't want the trading to take the form of American corporations draining Canada of our natural resources AND the profits that are gained by their liquidation." How are they able to do this if their economic strategy is failing so much?

"Anti-American" is a meaningless term. Coined by Americans for the purpose of dismissing legitimate international criticism without addressing the points raised. IMO, Canadians shouldn't be using it, and wouldn't be if we weren't exposed to so much US media.

I half agree. But there are cases when it is legitimately used.

 

[Alceste]

I would oppose his support for the war in Iraq if the purpose was not to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Any other justification is not a great enough excuse to warrant a war on Iraq. That's just my opinion, though. So long as the rationale was humanitarian/to remove a dictator, I'm fine with it.

I'm not OK with killing a half a million people to remove a dictator. Saddam would have died eventually. Things would have changed, because change is inevitable. There's no need to recklessly slaughter innocents just to speed things along. I'm not saying Saddam wasn't a jerk, but lots of dictators are much bigger jerks. The real reason for Iraq an insane US neo-con fantasy of permanent, global, American military, economic and ideological supremacy, along with a desire to gain control of what were believed at one time to be enormous oil reserves. The "humanitarian" aspect was just a sales pitch. I say this after having read "rebuilding america's defenses". US foreign and policy during the bush years adhered to it religiously. Note that it was written before the 9-11 attacks. Before Bush was even in his throne.

I was actually unaware he was director of the National Citizen's Coalition. I'll have to find more information on that. But if what you say is true, then I agree with you.

Yep, it's true. No secret. Current projects of the NCC, according to their website, are attacking labour unions, reducing royalties for the oil sector, relaxing environmental regulations, privatizing health care, dismanting the Human Rights Commissions and the Wheat Board, and lobbying for an immediate hiring freeze in the public sector, among other things. To be honest, I'm surprised people are not aware of this. An oil sector / health insurance sector lobbyist for Prime Minister? It's just embarassing.

All parties are guilty of gagging MPs. This isn't uniquely Conservative or Harper-based. But again, with the above, if it is true, then I share your sentiments.

The Toronto Star did a whole series of articles on Harper's fight against transparency. I can't find them now, but I see there's been more since:
TheStar.com | Canada | Tories kill information registry

Military alliances are exactly what keeps Canada a country. The Russians frequently send planes and subs through our airspace and waters in the Arctic. In the event of a Russian invasion, who do you expect to intervene on Canada's behalf? NATO?

I'm not worried about being invaded. Canada has a very open economic policy - who's going to spend billions of dollars to invade the country to get hold of resources we're willing to simply hand over for a weensie little piece of the pie? I also lack inherent Cold War era automatic paranoia about what the Russians are doing, being descended from Russians myself. The US is by far the greater danger. I would prefer to be neutral, like Switzerland. I'd even be willing to serve my two years if we were not allied with a terrorist state.

But I don't understand how you can claim the American economic strategy is failing and then say something like "I'm happy to trade, but I don't want the trading to take the form of American corporations draining Canada of our natural resources AND the profits that are gained by their liquidation." How are they able to do this if their economic strategy is failing so much?

It's complicated. Has a lot to do with their over-dependence on foreign creditors, their lack of energy independence, their overconsumption and their lack of preparedness for peak oil production and global warming. They're technically bankrupt now, but coasting along on the fact that oil is traded in US dollars. That could change pretty much overnight if oil-trading nations get the idea some other currency (like the Euro) is more stable, and the US economy would collapse.

 

[uu_sage]

1. Greens
2. NDP
3. Liberal

 

[Vile Atheist]

I'm not OK with killing a half a million people to remove a dictator. Saddam would have died eventually. Things would have changed, because change is inevitable. There's no need to recklessly slaughter innocents just to speed things along. I'm not saying Saddam wasn't a jerk, but lots of dictators are much bigger jerks. The real reason for Iraq an insane US neo-con fantasy of permanent, global, American military, economic and ideological supremacy, along with a desire to gain control of what were believed at one time to be enormous oil reserves. The "humanitarian" aspect was just a sales pitch. I say this after having read "rebuilding america's defenses". US foreign and policy during the bush years adhered to it religiously. Note that it was written before the 9-11 attacks. Before Bush was even in his throne.

I know what the Iraq war is really about and that's why I don't support it. I would have supported a military mission to assassinate Saddam and top Iraqi officials.

Yep, it's true. No secret. Current projects of the NCC, according to their website, are attacking labour unions, reducing royalties for the oil sector, relaxing environmental regulations, privatizing health care, dismanting the Human Rights Commissions and the Wheat Board, and lobbying for an immediate hiring freeze in the public sector, among other things. To be honest, I'm surprised people are not aware of this. An oil sector / health insurance sector lobbyist for Prime Minister? It's just embarassing.

As I said, I'll have to read up more information from direct sources before I make a fair judgement.

The Toronto Star did a whole series of articles on Harper's fight against transparency. I can't find them now, but I see there's been more since:
TheStar.com | Canada | Tories kill information registry

I'm not really surprised lol.

I'm not worried about being invaded. Canada has a very open economic policy - who's going to spend billions of dollars to invade the country to get hold of resources we're willing to simply hand over for a weensie little piece of the pie? I also lack inherent Cold War era automatic paranoia about what the Russians are doing, being descended from Russians myself. The US is by far the greater danger. I would prefer to be neutral, like Switzerland. I'd even be willing to serve my two years if we were not allied with a terrorist state.

You realize the Canadian Forces had to escort Russian bombers out of Canadian airspace at the same time Obama was visiting Ottawa? I see the US as a political threat and the Russians as a military threat. Both equally dangerous but with different goals.

It's complicated. Has a lot to do with their over-dependence on foreign creditors, their lack of energy independence, their overconsumption and their lack of preparedness for peak oil production and global warming. They're technically bankrupt now, but coasting along on the fact that oil is traded in US dollars. That could change pretty much overnight if oil-trading nations get the idea some other currency (like the Euro) is more stable, and the US economy would collapse.

Interesting. I am admittedly not well-versed in the United States economic strategies, but I'll add that to my list of "things to look up".