Is this place mostly liberal? Or are many of you conservatives?

Hello Red Tory Girl!

Hi Aaron, I hope you are sincere about being here. I always get burned.

Don't laugh I'm not trolling.

What's the Difference between being a liberal and conservitive?

baby kitten eating jokes aside how does one know if they are conservitive or liberal?

I'll use myself as an example.

I see myself as supporting the police and military with civilian oversight for both.

I'm pro choice. Mostly anti-death penalty. Very for helping the homeless. I think the government should pay for health care. Bigger prisons with longer stricter sentences for violent offenders. Anti olympics. Pro union. Very for seperation of church and state, respecting religion but believing it should have zero effect on politics and laws. Pro free speech and the right to protest. Decriminalize growing and smoking pot [Mind you I've never tried the stuff]. harsh punishments for drivers who drink and drive. Women should be paid the same as men. Jobs be given on merit and not gender or ethnicity. 

Is that hardcore right wing, center right, right of center, right but sneak over to the left now and then?

LTJ, I have to disagree. Many of us on the left have contradictory views. For example, being pro-union and also being pro-death penalty for child abusers. Some on the left are very pro-women's rights but wish to see longer prison terms for most offenders.

We are all walking contradictions. That's the nature of being human.

Personally I don't hold any of those views (more prisons, longer jail terms, anti-prostitution, anti-affirmative action) but I know some on the left who do.It's hard for me to consider them real lefty's but that's probably because I'm a socialist and a feminist.

My ex was very much a lefty, except he believes in capital punishment for child rapists.

Re the anti-prostitution thing, I wasn't singling you out P4.

Don't worry about being confused, who isn't?

PraetorianFour wrote:

I feel it's important to have a well funded well trained ethical and professional military to call on if needed. Same with police. It's important to enforce laws while having a professional and ethical police force that does not torture or abuse prisoners, throw cases or run unchecked through soceity. Some people think we don't need a military or even polce, I'm opposite.

There are very few pure and true anarchists in this world, P4. I can't imagine many people here disagreeing with what you call your 'support'. I do have to wonder why you feel the need to proclaim it, though.

Stargazer wrote:

LTJ, I have to disagree.

...do you really?

PraetorianFour wrote:

I see myself as supporting the police and military with civilian oversight for both.

I'm pro choice. Mostly anti-death penalty. Very for helping the homeless. I think the government should pay for health care. Bigger prisons with longer stricter sentences for violent offenders. Anti olympics. Pro union. Very for seperation of church and state, respecting religion but believing it should have zero effect on politics and laws. Pro free speech and the right to protest. Decriminalize growing and smoking pot [Mind you I've never tried the stuff]. harsh punishments for drivers who drink and drive. Women should be paid the same as men. Jobs be given on merit and not gender or ethnicity. 

Is that hardcore right wing, center right, right of center, right but sneak over to the left now and then?

With your explanation, I see that as left.

No one can doubt we have an epidemic of drunk driving, fed mostly by lack of enforcement of driving suspensions. The "harsh punishment" I would like is to use technology to ensure that their vehicles can be driven only by others.

"Longer stricter sentences for violent offenders" need not mean longer minimum sentences. The Crown sometimes fails to seek dangerous offender status when they could.

As for police, it wasn't just Tony Blair who campaigned on the slogan "More nurses, more teachers, more police." Lots of municipal leftists want community policing, with more police on the street.

The military are neither left nor right, thank heavens. They carry out the mission, whether it's humanitarian, or tackling a rogue right-wing regime (Somalia, Taliban), or whatever. They either do it with inadequate equipment at undue risk, or with better equipment. 

@WCG I'd say it's quite classically conservative to be a Euro-style Social Democrat, but then, that's how I construct my toryism.

And just to note, as I always do: When it comes to ideology, liberal =/= left wing and conservative =/= right wing. For one example, the administration of John Diefenbaker was a lot more leftist than that of Jean Chretien.

Frmrsldr wrote:

Wilf Day wrote:

The military are neither left nor right, thank heavens. They carry out the mission, whether it's humanitarian, or tackling a rogue right-wing regime (Somalia, Taliban), or whatever. They either do it with inadequate equipment at undue risk, or with better equipment. 

Sorry Wilf. I'm going to call you on this one. To support war, any war (save for a just war of defense when one has been attacked and/or invaded with armed force by another country - as defined by the Nuremberg Trials, the Nuremberg Principles, the Geneva Conventions, the U.N. Charter and other relevant international laws, treaties, conventions and protocols, etc.,) is political. Look at former Gen. Rick Hillier. He was Canada's most political soldier. Frighteningly so. Red Shirt Fridays, Hockey Night in Canada and Don Cherry's "Support The Troops" and support the war, were Hillier's brain children.

You're either a pro war zombie or an antiwar/propeace activist. There is no (logically consistent) middle ground. Soldiers fighting in Afghanistan are making a political statement that they support the war and the governments (Liberal and Conservative) that sent them there.

Are you referring to state-sancitoned war? There are current militaries that aren't legitimated by the state (i.e., FARC, Etnocacerista Reserve Army in Peru) and are clearly left or radically anti-colonial.

Quote:

The military are neither left nor right, thank heavens. They carry out the mission, whether it's humanitarian, or tackling a rogue right-wing regime (Somalia, Taliban), or whatever. They either do it with inadequate equipment at undue risk, or with better equipment.

My goodness, no. The military are very much right wing. They will carry out whatever mission their corporate bosses tell them to do. If that means shooting olympic protesters, they will gladly do it. All to protect freedom, you see. And yes, they will complain, decked out in kevlar body armour, night vision glasses, and armoured vehicles, about "inadequate equipment" while they face an enemy in sandals and linen.

Their is no such thing as a "humanitarian mission", and the only requirement for being a "rogue" regime is disobeying the commands of the imperial powers. That hasn't changed in hundreds of years. There is nothing particularly "rogue" about the Taliban; they could be looked on as a lighter version of the House of Saud, which enjoys our protection despite their horrific human rights abuses and decidedly less-than-progessive stance on things like social equality. 

But I digress. Our military will perform its duty for the highest bidder. Right now, that is the USA. So, wherever there are markets to be opened, Canadian troops will be there. Wherever people call out for justice and solidarity, Canadian troops will be there.....hired by the bosses to beat those people down. Wherever natural disaster strikes, Canadian troops will be there....to protect the landowners from the masses of poor and to ensure that the factories remain in the right hands. Wherever people strain under the yoke of barbarism and oppression, Canadian troops will be there...backing up the oppressor. If we can't be there in person, by god we'll sell them all the weapons they need.

That's all anyone can expect from a professional standing army. The Generals are politicians, and they are wealthy. They are among the ruling elite and are sympathetic to the far right causes of our wealthy rulers. It has been amply demonstrated that standing armies are the biggest threat to democracy and human rights. Canada enjoys no exception to this rule.

Jingles wrote:

It has been amply demonstrated that standing armies are the biggest threat to democracy and human rights.

... and liberty. Never a truer word was spoken by a greater patriot.

Some definitions for the sake of clarity:

Patriotism = Fealty to the welfare of one's (country's) fellow citizens.

Nationalism = Fealty and professed loyalty to one's national government.

Jingles wrote:

The military are very much right wing.

The troops that came home from the second world war mostly voted CCF in Canada, and Labour in the UK. Those veterans formed much of the leadership of the burgeoning trade union movement post-1945, and the credit unions in many communities, and so on.

My father and his brothers achieved grade nine level of schooling. They went overseas and were not so politically minded. All they knew was that they wanted to get back to their families here in Canada. My mother came from England, and she was appalled at the living conditions in Northern Ontario. Dad became an NDPer because of mum, whose family mostly vote Labour back in England. Dad was constantly being laid off at the mill after the war and lost ten years seniority due to layoffs and no callbacks etc. A mini-boom at the mill from 1950-53(Korean war - they needed steel) and never really got steady full-time work until the 1960's.  Lost another five years seniority at the mill due to volunteering for overseas. His wife and my mother is now living on partial pensions and low income, and the private benefits plan from the mill has switched insurers. Now some of her drugs aren't covered. Nice stuff. And back in the late 40's-early 50's, the government encouraged veterans to do all kinds of whacky things to employ themselves, like buying an acre of land within city limits.

My dad took night courses for mineral prospecting. So then he goes in the bush on weekends and makes a gold find. Stakes a bunch of claims, forms a company and sells penny stock to raise cash for the thing. Next thing he knows, the provincial paramilitaries burn his shack down and steal his canoes. A year later he gets a letter from the conservative government minister of mines that a provincial park was to be formed, and it would include his gold claims. No offer of compensation nothing nada. It was a Stalinist bureaucracy then under the provincial conservatives for many years. They are still sitting on dad's gold find to this day as is a major foreign mining company with claims very nearby to dad's.

And one of dad's relatives was a military officer who helped Fitzgibbons stop the American invasion of Upper Canada way back when, No, I would not recommend the Canadian military to anyone.

Red Tory Tea Girl wrote:

There are some very, very, left-wing conservatives who would never vote Conservative here too, mind you, but we're mostly invisible... Not that I'd ever know what that's like in the rest of my life.

It's difficult to know what to make of someone who identifies politically as a conservative of any stripe or hue, considering the variety of strains we're all too familiar with. It's like saying the Jim Jones concept of a socialist paradise started out as nifty idea but something went amiss, if only we could capture the essence of the original thought, or, similar to a belief that National Socialism made the most sense when they simply stuck to promises of bread and work for the people, it was just taken over by its more extreme elements.

For the left leaning here in Canada, a deft balancing act requiring the dexterity of a contortionist is recommended as an essential skill set, especially for those who find inspiration in the polices and actions of the mainstream roach motel version that we have, where the intricate simulations do little to disguise what is essentially a centrist inspired vision.

Defining oneself becomes an exercise in subjectivity.

Another thing to consider is that few of us think we must be either liberal or conservative. There are other possibilities - and I don't mean 'moderate'! 

Frmrsldr wrote:

That's the difference between a draft versus a volunteer military.

I somehow don't think so. There is certainly no signs of a returning military presence in the current left. The Great Depression made many Canadians believe in communism and socialism and those people signed up to fight the fascists as well as people like my Dad who hated commies. Of course the Mac Paps weren't allowed to fight but that is another story.

There is no doubt that Dief was further left than most of Canada's PM's but then Wacky Bennett's government probably nationalized more services than any other leader in Canadian history. Our political discourse has been derailed by the constant Chicago School mantra that government is bad. "If it moves privatize it" has been the Fraser Institute motto for 20 years and we are seeing the horrific results of abandoning the minimal commitment to mutual aid our society had after the War.  Now we just have endless war for profit hardly a noble profession when it involves ethnically cleansing various regions of the world from Yugoslavia to Afghanistan.

In the other thread..."thankyou men" ???

In this thread... Thank you gentlemen???

*muffled snort*   c'mon, remind, we've gotta keep him for a while!

Aaron, I've been moderating here for almost 4 years and posting since pretty near the beginning.  I can assure you sir, that remind is no gentleman!

At what point do we let Aaron know that everyone on babble is in fact a lesbian art student majoring in modern dance?