They left Canada to be wife to a jihadist in the new caliphate. Should we still be calling them leftists? The term is stretched beyond utility if it has to encompass both Marxists and Islamofascists. The two groups agree on almost nothing except to vote for Trudeau.
I used to genuinely believe that Canadians, Anglo Canadians anyway, were fundamentally good, decent people. Particularly when I compared us to cultures I encountered during travels abroad. COVID changed my opinion. Canadians are not fundamentally good. We are fundamentally harmless. We are not strong people who choose not to hurt one another; we are incapable of imposing our wills on the world. Our people have proven to be every bit as susceptible to state propaganda as East Germans ratting one another out to the STASI; every bit as willing to conform to government dictates as Muslims forcing women into burkas when the ayatollahs take over. It's been a disheartening year, losing faith in my own people.
LOCAL strategic voting based on what will work in your area
Sadly, living in Ottawa, my vote does not matter. The strategic option would be biting my tongue and voting for the NDP as neither O'Toole nor Bernier has a chance of winning here.
What is the difference between 3rd degree murder and manslaughter in Minnesota?
With regards to the felony murder charge, what is the underlying felony which the prosecution is contending Chauvin was commiting when Floyd was killed?
Who are they trying to appeal with this? Militant atheists?
I doubt it's a strategic national policy decision at all. This sounds more like the work of one or two party insiders who are seeking to rig a local race in favour of their preferred candidate.
because it’s in the name of “safety”
Like a... (Committee of Public Safety)[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_of_Public_Safety]? Yeah, I've already seen this episode.
Our current constitution is not fit for purpose to go that route. Parliamentary supremecy is built into the bones of the document. It's greater failing is that it is written such that the constitution is granting rights to citizens, as opposed to the perspective that citizens have natural rights and the job of a constitution to forbid the government from violating them. I would love to see some "Parliament shall pass no law..." clauses in v2.0.
Be wary of putting your faith in "of the people, by the people" language. There's nothing wise or sacred about "the people". Mob rule is all democracy amounts to. The rule of law has as much work to do restraining the passions of the demos as the ambitions of the state.
So Parliament is at the top of the pile? Not a good plan. They change every eight years or so. The monarchy gives a sense of permanence to government. The monarch is the font of honour for our honour and awards system. Would you want to receive an Order of Canada knowing that it just originates with Justin Trudeau? The Queen was appointed by God; Trudeau was just born with a nice head of hair.
The Americans sidestep this by putting their Constitution at the top of the hierarchy, but we can't do that with our current constitution since it's written on toilet paper and parliamentary supremecy is the law of the land.
I'm moving to the malicious compliance phase of mask wearing. I've ordered a creepy anime cosplay mask that covers the whole face plus shaded lenses over the eyes. It does cover the nose and mouth and it can be non-medical.