Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by 2ArmBands

Just so we are clear. The leader of the opposition should not criticize the incumbent?

The lead of the opposition should attack the government not the country

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by StickMan

You must be ######ed. None of the Canadian parties are fascists. You honestly believe crap like that? Do you even know what that word means?

How is it different that the bat#### crazy garbage you spout off

[StickMan]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

How is it different that the bat#### crazy garbage you spout off

Like what?

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by StickMan

Yes please explain to me why anyone would want to keep the current government in power for 4 more years.

But the current government (Trudeau) isn't going to be in power for another 4 years.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by StickMan

Yes please explain to me why anyone would want to keep the current government in power for 4 more years.

I wont bother as I don’t believe you are being genuine in your interest. However if you think about it and present your thoughts I’m happy to suggest critiques of your reasoning.. Perhaps you should think about it for a while and look at the criticisms of the UCP and the policies of each party and look for situations in which people would feel better off under a Carney Liberal government would be better than PP UCP government.

I start with evaluating your underlying assumption that a Carney Liberal government is keeping the current government in power another 4 years. Based on polling many Canadians don’t hold this assumption.

not understanding why someone would vote the way they do shows a profound lack of curiosity and a seeming inability to put yourself in someone else’s shoes. Take some time and really think about it. Perhaps it will moderate your current view points..

[madmike]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I have a question.

Why do you think Ontario votes Conservative in Provincial elections but Liberal in Federal elections?

Bad provincial Liberal legacy (the Libs were in a VERY long time). The McGuinty decision to cancel hydro plants in Oakville and Mississauga to save a couple of seats really did the party in (although given they were going to be natural gas plants, it was likely a fortuitous cancellation). And the Libs haven’t had an effective leader since Wynn. Crombie has been all but invisible since becoming the Lib leader.

Ford is likely corrupt. He’s not that bright. But he’s an amazing retail politician who runs more as an old PC-style leader than a hardcore Conservative. In Ontario that works.

[StickMan]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

But the current government (Trudeau) isn't going to be in power for another 4 years.

You realize it is all the same people right? Even Carney has been the liberal party economic advisor since like 2020. It is all the same people. Nothing has changed, they just shuffled around positions.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by 2ArmBands

Just so we are clear. The leader of the opposition should not criticize the incumbent?

Yup, that is exactly what I said.

You understand it's possible to criticize a government in a more meaningful and nuanced way than just saying "Canada is Broken" right?

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by StickMan

You realize it is all the same people right? Even Carney has been the liberal party economic advisor since like 2020. It is all the same people. Nothing has changed, they just shuffled around positions.

And yet you wouldn't argue that if the conservatives were in power I assume?

[StickMan]

Originally Posted by GGG

I wont bother as I don’t believe you are being genuine in your interest. However if you think about it and present your thoughts I’m happy to suggest critiques of your reasoning.. Perhaps you should think about it for a while and look at the criticisms of the UCP and the policies of each party and look for situations in which people would feel better off under a Carney Liberal government would be better than PP UCP government.

I start with evaluating your underlying assumption that a Carney Liberal government is keeping the current government in power another 4 years. Based on polling many Canadians don’t hold this assumption.

not understanding why someone would vote the way they do shows a profound lack of curiosity and a seeming inability to put yourself in someone else’s shoes. Take some time and really think about it. Perhaps it will moderate your current view points..

Canadians don't hold this assumption because the media isn't framing it this way. the media makes a huge difference, that is why government funding media is very bad.

[Senator Clay Davis]

StickMan dropping a trolling masterclass, Yoho would be proud.

[Cycling76er]

Originally Posted by 2ArmBands

Just so we are clear. The leader of the opposition should not criticize the incumbent?

Is that literally all they should do though?

Personally, I think the best thing that could happen to our government is a minority. No one party wholly represents the interests of all Canadians. It would be of benefit to more Canadians if parties needed to rely on the other ones to help steer the ship.

The things that are important to me for our country do not represent a gold standard for how things should be run for all Canadians. We are a vast and diverse nation. My neighbor's voice should be heard. The country folk around me should be heard. The city folk around me should be heard. Fair representation in government is important.

But, people would rather just pick a team and say '#### em'' for anyone else not on that team. Their voices and concerns don't matter.

Should the opposition be critical? Yes.

Should they be critical just to cause friction and chaos? No.

The latter is all that PP ever does. It got old, quick.

[StickMan]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

And yet you wouldn't argue that if the conservatives were in power I assume?

If the conservatives had been the government for the last decade and we were in this exact situation, I would definately vote them out, no questions, wouldn't matter how they reshuffle the party.

Now if Carney had all new Liberal party members under him, I would consider evaluating and voting liberal as it would be a change. But there is no way I'm voting back the same team of liberals for another 4 years. I would still be concerned about Carney's conflicts and associations. Fool me once....

Mark my words, if the liberals get another term nothing will change. I have a feeling ill be quoting this post before the end of the year.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by StickMan

If the conservatives had been the government for the last decade and we were in this exact situation, I would definately vote them out, no questions, wouldn't matter how they reshuffle the party.

Now if Carney had all new Liberal party members under him, I would consider evaluating and voting liberal as it would be a change. But there is no way I'm voting back the same team of liberals for another 4 years. Fool me once....

How many times have you not voted conservative?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

StickMan dropping a trolling masterclass, Yoho would be proud.

Missing the tweets.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by StickMan

You must be ######ed. None of the Canadian parties are fascists. You honestly believe crap like that? Do you even know what that word means?

If you want to get technical, no I don't fully believe he's an outright fascist, but that doesn't mean I trust him to NOT be one.

I honestly believe that Pierre Poilievre is a far right conservative who has lied through his teeth to Canadians while having ties to Diagolon.

I honestly believe that Pierre Poilievre is a member of the IDU, which exchange ideas on what modern conservatism should be.

I honestly believe that MAGA have proven to be textbook fascist, and MAGA are also a member of that IDU. And their sphere of influence extends to the rest of the IDU.

I honestly believe that a lot of PP's tactics are blatantly IDU-influenced.

I honestly believe that Russia has been implementing a psyops attack on our country and it is in Russian interests (pretty damn close to the most classic fascist regime of the modern era) to empower far right parties like MAGA and Poilievre's CPC to grow to power because they undermine the stability of this continent by implementing pro-oligarch policies, and in effect undermine NATO's defensive structure.

I honestly believe as a Calgarian that there used to be a progressive conservative Canadian party, but the CPC is not that party.

Beyond what I honestly believe, here's a quick analysis stitched together by everyone' favorite friend these days:

Proto-Fascist Tendencies in Canadian Conservative Leadership: A Critical Analysis of Pierre Poilievre’s Rhetoric, Strategy, and Transnational Alliances
Abstract
This paper examines Canadian Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre’s rhetorical and political strategies through the lens of fascist theory and contemporary authoritarian populism. While refraining from labeling Poilievre as a fascist in the classical sense, this critique highlights demonstrable affinities between his political conduct and pre-fascist or proto-authoritarian tendencies. Specific focus is given to his use of misinformation, his normalization of the notwithstanding clause, his populist communication style, his affiliation with far-right media (notably Rebel News), his alignment with the International Democrat Union (IDU), and his willingness to erode institutional norms.

1. Introduction: Fascism Reconsidered in the 21st Century
Contemporary political theorists, including Umberto Eco and Jason Stanley, have proposed that fascism in modern democracies may reappear not through overt dictatorship, but through the erosion of democratic institutions, the corrosion of truth, and the cultivation of reactionary populism. This paper argues that Pierre Poilievre's behavior as the leader of Canada's Conservative Party reflects several of these proto-fascist traits, particularly in the realms of rhetoric, media alignment, disregard for democratic norms, and transnational affiliations.

2. Defining Fascist Tendencies: A Theoretical Framework
While classical fascism refers to 20th-century regimes like Mussolini’s Italy or Franco’s Spain, contemporary scholarship recognizes a spectrum of authoritarian populist behaviors that echo fascist practices. These include:

Disdain for deliberative democracy

Manipulation of truth through propaganda and disinformation

Cultivation of “us versus them” national identity

Scapegoating of marginalized groups or political opponents

Threats to legal and institutional norms

Centralization of power around a strongman figure

By assessing Poilievre’s conduct through this theoretical lens, we can situate his political project within a broader global shift toward reactionary populism and illiberalism.

3. Weaponizing Disinformation and Disregard for Fact-Checking
Poilievre's communication strategy consistently leverages misinformation and misleading narratives, particularly on issues like inflation, crime, public health, and immigration. Independent fact-checkers, including Reuters, Global News, and CBC's Facts Beyond the Headlines, have repeatedly flagged his claims as inaccurate or lacking context. Notably:

He has claimed that safe consumption sites increase overdose deaths, despite peer-reviewed research to the contrary.

He has accused the Bank of Canada of reckless money printing, misrepresenting how monetary policy works in the Canadian context.

His framing of violent crime data often ignores long-term downward trends or cherry-picks short-term fluctuations.

His refusal to correct these inaccuracies even after public debunking reflects a post-truth approach to politics. This aligns with what Hannah Arendt called the “obliteration of the line between fact and fiction,” a hallmark of fascist and authoritarian movements.

4. The Notwithstanding Clause: Normalizing Constitutional Exceptionalism
Poilievre has publicly mused about the preemptive use of the notwithstanding clause, framing it as a tool to override judicial or Charter-based protections on issues ranging from criminal justice to freedom of expression. This instrumentalization of a constitutional emergency mechanism is unprecedented in its rhetorical casualness and raises profound democratic concerns.

While the clause is legal under the Canadian constitution, its routine use would signal a dangerous shift from rights-based governance to majoritarian rule, echoing how authoritarian leaders elsewhere have manipulated constitutional loopholes to erode minority protections and judicial independence (e.g., Viktor Orbán in Hungary).

5. Populist Framing and the Demonization of Institutions
Poilievre frames himself as a warrior against “gatekeepers,” “elites,” and “woke bureaucrats,” deploying a Manichean populism in which all institutional authority is suspect unless it serves his narrative. This strategy:

Delegitimizes expertise (e.g., in economics, public health, or law)

Undermines public trust in democratic institutions

Positions Poilievre as the sole voice of “the people,” a classic authoritarian trope

This rhetorical positioning fosters resentment-based nationalism, aligning with fascist appeals to a morally pure but besieged populace.

6. The Role of Far-Right Media: The Rebel News Nexus
Poilievre’s repeated engagement with Rebel News, a media outlet known for white nationalist sympathies, climate change denial, and inflammatory rhetoric against Muslims, immigrants, and trans people, further underscores his ideological proximity to the far-right. His willingness to appear in interviews with Rebel News and share its content lends legitimacy to conspiratorial and extremist views.

This association parallels the media tactics of Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro, who similarly bypassed mainstream press in favor of ideologically aligned echo chambers, enabling direct mobilization of grievance politics without accountability.

7. IDU Membership and Global Authoritarian Affiliations
Poilievre’s membership in the International Democrat Union (IDU) situates him within a transnational network of conservative and far-right parties, including:

Fidesz (Hungary), whose leader Orbán has dismantled democratic safeguards and repressed civil society;

The U.S. Republican Party, increasingly aligned with authoritarian populism and election denialism;

European parties known for anti-immigrant stances and Islamophobia.

Although the IDU nominally promotes democratic values, its ideological drift reflects increasing tolerance of illiberalism. Poilievre has made no effort to disassociate himself from this trend, suggesting at least tacit endorsement of a global anti-liberal agenda.

8. Conclusion: The Danger of Normalization
Pierre Poilievre may not self-identify as a fascist, nor does he advocate explicit dictatorship. However, his political style—characterized by disinformation, institutional delegitimization, populist scapegoating, authoritarian legal threats, and far-right affiliations—reflects many fascist-adjacent tendencies.

In a time of rising global authoritarianism, the Canadian public and democratic institutions must remain vigilant. Fascism rarely arrives with jackboots and banners—it often creeps in through the normalization of anti-democratic behavior under the guise of “common sense” and populist restoration.

References
Eco, Umberto. Ur-Fascism. The New York Review of Books.
Stanley, Jason. How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them.
Arendt, Hannah. The Origins of Totalitarianism.
CBC News, Global News, Reuters Fact Checks
International Democrat Union (IDU) website
Rebel News Archives and watchdog reporting
Academic studies on the use of the notwithstanding clause

Of course, my post on fascism was somewhat tongue in cheek and there are more rational arguments for wanting a liberal or even NDP government, but you don't seem worthwhile to make those with.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

How many times have you not voted conservative?

He’s just saying whatever bull#### he thinks he needs to say so that people take him seriously and less like a total joke.

Same guy who said he’d be OK with another Liberal majority if it wasn’t under Trudeau, but now that they’ve switched leaders it’s all the same and stockholm syndrome and extremist climate activists or whatever lol.

Guy is so full of it you can smell it on his breath.

[KelVarnsen]

This is same #### that got MelBridgeman banned. The mods need to do the same to Stickman.

[LanceUppercut]

Mark Carney could promise to raise my taxes to 95% and I'd still vote for him over mini-Trump PP. The modern conservative movement needs to jettison the entire maple MAGA contingent out of the party before I consider them again.



Note: I've never voted anything but Conservative my entire life. The party left me, I did not change my views.

[Paulie Walnuts]

How is he not mini Trump.

Just look at how he went to suppourt the trucker ####ers, that is like Donald and Jan 6th and he has called it a day of love.