I'm going to take heat for this from this group, but what ever. In the current political climate, I will not be able to vote for a leader who shares all of my values. That's just reality. They will not win.
I would rather get 40% of what I want than 0% of what I want. I don't think that makes me a sell out. I don't think it's a mistake either. There are certain people who will not be able to become Prime Minister. My vote isn't the only one that matters.
We need to be Machiavellian. We need to do what the left has done. Infiltrate corporations, infiltrate academia, give money to causes we support, and if those causes don't exist, create them ourselves.
While I fucking hate Gandhi, "be the change you want to see".
I'm not risking my livelihood by screeching on twitter. I'm high up enough at a massive corporation that I get to decide who to hire. I give money to causes I support, and I continue to try to drive my net worth, and influence how I can.
I agree with a lot of Sloan says. However, Sloan is too straightforward for a politician. You think Trudeau says what he thinks or means? The king of black face really care about racism? The emperor of ethics breaches really care about 'open and transparent' government? The man who sexually harassed a reporter really a feminist?
He is literally more racist, more corrupt, and less feminist than I would ever be. Yet all those groups would call this conservative any name in the book while giving him a pass. Because the man lies. That's what politicians have.
I respect honest people. Politics isn't the place for telling people how it is. Hasn't been since ancient antiquity, isn't now, and never will be.
The masses will always prefer a sweet lie over a hard truth. This is far more complicated than anyone would like to admit, and we need to be far more strategic than any of you would like. To win, we will all need to compromise on our beliefs. It sucks, because the reason most of us have been banished here is because we're the type of people who are unwilling to do so. Stuck right between a rock an a hard place.
Problem is the whole confederation is already built on compromised beliefs, and as right as you may be, compromising further on some issues means total capitulation.
What if engaging in Machiavellian behaviour is the precise polar opposite to our value of say for example, free and fair elections? If we lower our standards to the opposition on matters fundamental to democracy, how can we expect our society to reflect those kinds of values?
Ultimately with that dilemma it's a similar failure, but you may be right. A war of ideas cannot be won while your side is censored and misrepresented, and having the power to prevent that may well be a way to battle to a victory of that war.
I agree, and I don't like it. Exactly why you'll never see me in politics. Just because I hate it doesn't mean I don't at least understand that it may be a necessity.
I'm going to take heat for this from this group, but what ever. In the current political climate, I will not be able to vote for a leader who shares all of my values. That's just reality. They will not win.
I would rather get 40% of what I want than 0% of what I want. I don't think that makes me a sell out. I don't think it's a mistake either. There are certain people who will not be able to become Prime Minister. My vote isn't the only one that matters.
We need to be Machiavellian. We need to do what the left has done. Infiltrate corporations, infiltrate academia, give money to causes we support, and if those causes don't exist, create them ourselves.
While I fucking hate Gandhi, "be the change you want to see".
I'm not risking my livelihood by screeching on twitter. I'm high up enough at a massive corporation that I get to decide who to hire. I give money to causes I support, and I continue to try to drive my net worth, and influence how I can.
I agree with a lot of Sloan says. However, Sloan is too straightforward for a politician. You think Trudeau says what he thinks or means? The king of black face really care about racism? The emperor of ethics breaches really care about 'open and transparent' government? The man who sexually harassed a reporter really a feminist?
He is literally more racist, more corrupt, and less feminist than I would ever be. Yet all those groups would call this conservative any name in the book while giving him a pass. Because the man lies. That's what politicians have.
I respect honest people. Politics isn't the place for telling people how it is. Hasn't been since ancient antiquity, isn't now, and never will be.
The masses will always prefer a sweet lie over a hard truth. This is far more complicated than anyone would like to admit, and we need to be far more strategic than any of you would like. To win, we will all need to compromise on our beliefs. It sucks, because the reason most of us have been banished here is because we're the type of people who are unwilling to do so. Stuck right between a rock an a hard place.
Problem is the whole confederation is already built on compromised beliefs, and as right as you may be, compromising further on some issues means total capitulation.
What if engaging in Machiavellian behaviour is the precise polar opposite to our value of say for example, free and fair elections? If we lower our standards to the opposition on matters fundamental to democracy, how can we expect our society to reflect those kinds of values?
Would you rather capitulate on your moral compass and win, or never compromise and lose utterly?
You can't fight fair against and adversary that refuses to do so.
Ultimately with that dilemma it's a similar failure, but you may be right. A war of ideas cannot be won while your side is censored and misrepresented, and having the power to prevent that may well be a way to battle to a victory of that war.
I agree, and I don't like it. Exactly why you'll never see me in politics. Just because I hate it doesn't mean I don't at least understand that it may be a necessity.