You’d be surprised to find out that most people here mostly agree with you. Your just very abrasive so you get bad interactions.
Also this Carney=PP is very privileged of you. If you were a woman, a minority, LGBT especially T you’d have a very different opinion on that last part. Sure they’re both economic neoliberals, but only one would repeal abortion rights or ban Muslims or implement anti trans legislation.
Don’t waste your breath trying to reason with him. The guy spent 24 hours crying that everyone in this thread is a “Carney cultist,” and the second someone brings up marginalized people, he unironically starts running PR for Pierre Poilievre.
He doesn’t actually care about policy or vulnerable people. He’s just so desperate to win an internet argument that he’ll happily whitewash the CPC’s social conservatism to keep his tantrum alive.
Poilievre, to the best of my knowledge, has not indicated he would re-open the abortion debate, ban Muslims or implement anti-trans legislation.
But the whole problem with this pile-on is that this event has nothing to do with Poilievre, he’s just the handy trope that Liberals self-soothe with when they have to face the fact that Carney is a monster.
Carney, who is in power, laughed at Trump “joking” about murdering crews of fishing boats with drones, cheered the start of the US-Israeli strikes on Iran, and refuses to condemn Israel’s genocide of Palestinians.
He did not push back against the US ending the ‘X’ gender marker on Nexus cards, which was called out by many trans folks as a failure to stand up for trans rights.
Regardless, slashing public services will always hit marginalized folks the hardest, so it’s a bit rich to imply that the PM who is making the largest cuts in modern history is somehow a friend to minorities and queer folks.
The fact that you’re saying people agree with me so I should be less “abrasive”, while simultaneously telling me I’m wrong about Carney, is also pretty telling.
You just have a romantic view of electoral politics. The things both parties agree on (like gutting the public sector and arming Israel for their genocide) you can’t vote for at the ballot box. When you say they’re both the same we agree on this front. It’s not one of the choices offered at the election and we have to act outside of the political system (protests, unions, strikes, arson, whatever…) to get those done.
However that doesn’t mean that nothing is at stake during the election. We have to think of everyone in Canadian society and vote for the practical option which will have the best outcome for the most people in solidarity with the most vulnerable. Just because liberals and conservatives are both pieces of shit doesn’t mean there aren’t differences between them. And just because you take an hour to vote every 4 years doesn’t mean you can’t pursue whatever leftists, anarchist, revolutionary or other political goals you would like to act on the rest of the time.
You’re not compromising your values when you vote you’re just acting in good solidarity with the marginalised people for whom there is a difference between parties.
Thank you for the link, I’ll take a look. But I don’t agree that my view on electoral politics is in any way “romantic” — I’m saying (probably elsewhere in this overall godforsaken discussion) that elections are only a small part of how the people can influence government. Which means I actually believe, in this case — and hear me out — that a Poilievre government would have been better than a Carney government, because the same people saying “LOL I bet Poilievre is annoyed” would be in the streets protesting this event if it were Poilievre hosting it. Poilievre simply would not have the societal permission structure to do any of the heinous shit Carney is doing!
The same goes for almost everything Carney has done, from cuts to the public sector to eviscerating climate goals. People would be up in arms about ALL of it if the person doing it was wearing the blue team’s shirt. Instead, half the country is like “welp, better than the other guy so can’t complain” instead of DOING something about what the guy IN POWER is doing. This is why I continually describe what’s happening as cult-like behaviour.
You’d be surprised to find out that most people here mostly agree with you. Your just very abrasive so you get bad interactions.
Also this Carney=PP is very privileged of you. If you were a woman, a minority, LGBT especially T you’d have a very different opinion on that last part. Sure they’re both economic neoliberals, but only one would repeal abortion rights or ban Muslims or implement anti trans legislation.
Don’t waste your breath trying to reason with him. The guy spent 24 hours crying that everyone in this thread is a “Carney cultist,” and the second someone brings up marginalized people, he unironically starts running PR for Pierre Poilievre.
He doesn’t actually care about policy or vulnerable people. He’s just so desperate to win an internet argument that he’ll happily whitewash the CPC’s social conservatism to keep his tantrum alive.
Poilievre, to the best of my knowledge, has not indicated he would re-open the abortion debate, ban Muslims or implement anti-trans legislation.
But the whole problem with this pile-on is that this event has nothing to do with Poilievre, he’s just the handy trope that Liberals self-soothe with when they have to face the fact that Carney is a monster.
Carney, who is in power, laughed at Trump “joking” about murdering crews of fishing boats with drones, cheered the start of the US-Israeli strikes on Iran, and refuses to condemn Israel’s genocide of Palestinians.
He did not push back against the US ending the ‘X’ gender marker on Nexus cards, which was called out by many trans folks as a failure to stand up for trans rights.
Regardless, slashing public services will always hit marginalized folks the hardest, so it’s a bit rich to imply that the PM who is making the largest cuts in modern history is somehow a friend to minorities and queer folks.
The fact that you’re saying people agree with me so I should be less “abrasive”, while simultaneously telling me I’m wrong about Carney, is also pretty telling.
You just have a romantic view of electoral politics. The things both parties agree on (like gutting the public sector and arming Israel for their genocide) you can’t vote for at the ballot box. When you say they’re both the same we agree on this front. It’s not one of the choices offered at the election and we have to act outside of the political system (protests, unions, strikes, arson, whatever…) to get those done.
However that doesn’t mean that nothing is at stake during the election. We have to think of everyone in Canadian society and vote for the practical option which will have the best outcome for the most people in solidarity with the most vulnerable. Just because liberals and conservatives are both pieces of shit doesn’t mean there aren’t differences between them. And just because you take an hour to vote every 4 years doesn’t mean you can’t pursue whatever leftists, anarchist, revolutionary or other political goals you would like to act on the rest of the time.
You’re not compromising your values when you vote you’re just acting in good solidarity with the marginalised people for whom there is a difference between parties.
Here is pp on trans rights https://thetyee.ca/News/2025/01/27/Poilievre-Scored-Political-Points-Trans-Rights/
He’s also routinely seen with far right, white supremacist, and nationalist organisations such as diagolon and their leaders.
Thank you for the link, I’ll take a look. But I don’t agree that my view on electoral politics is in any way “romantic” — I’m saying (probably elsewhere in this overall godforsaken discussion) that elections are only a small part of how the people can influence government. Which means I actually believe, in this case — and hear me out — that a Poilievre government would have been better than a Carney government, because the same people saying “LOL I bet Poilievre is annoyed” would be in the streets protesting this event if it were Poilievre hosting it. Poilievre simply would not have the societal permission structure to do any of the heinous shit Carney is doing!
The same goes for almost everything Carney has done, from cuts to the public sector to eviscerating climate goals. People would be up in arms about ALL of it if the person doing it was wearing the blue team’s shirt. Instead, half the country is like “welp, better than the other guy so can’t complain” instead of DOING something about what the guy IN POWER is doing. This is why I continually describe what’s happening as cult-like behaviour.