TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Yesterdays Protests
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Yesterdays Protests

I find the contrasts between the 2 protest rallies rather interesting. The Pro coalition rally is full of union flags, professionally produced special interests signs and every taxpayer funded self server you can think of. I think what said it best is the fact that the communist party showed up to the rally!!!

The Anti coalition rally looks like a bunch of ordinary pissed off canadians with home made signs and flags.

That you think that union workers are something other than ordinary pissed off canadians speaks volumes.

perspective's a sonofabitch, aint it?

organized politicized groups as opposed to random citizens are vastly different.

Regardless of strategic wording, regardless of praising the one while villifying the other... at the end of the day, they're all just citizens looking out for their best interests. To think otherwise is delusional.

Once that's understood, it's not so wrong to be straight up about the side you represent and say what you feel, that the other side sucks.

quote:

Originally posted by daves Regardless of strategic wording, regardless of praising the one while villifying the other... at the end of the day, they're all just citizens looking out for their best interests. To think otherwise is delusional. Once that's understood, it's not so wrong to be straight up about the side you represent and say what you feel, that the other side sucks.

Big up "daves"!

to attempt to further separate the differences people seeking the same end is petty political wrangling. I dont know what the good is in over stating the obvious that these 2 oil and water type rallies have very different feels to them. Its obvious they do and they will always.

The conventions of the 2 parties in the states; were almost for different countries altogether. One spoke of war and represented the gun toting army celebrating culture and the other was positive and hopeful - full of a vision of positivity. they are always going to be different.

Conservatism is in need of a vast overhaul, its time for the socially skewed to take a beating the way leftist took it for a long time.

That jayx pokes fun at the fact that at a liberal rally sits a microscopic element of communism is as relevant a representation of one extreme as having the saturation of army imagery at conservative rallies and events.

organized labour unions seeking direct monetary and political gain as motivation to show up at a rally is much much different than citizens with little to gain (directly at least) who show up to voice their opinions. Its too bad that you guys cant see the difference. In fact one guy at the anti rally actually had a home made sign that said "im OPSEU but i am against the coalition".

quote:

Originally posted by 7-4-7 Conservatism is in need of a vast overhaul, its time for the socially skewed to take a beating the way leftist took it for a long time.

lol wut?

you're almost an outcast if you hace conservative morals and values for a long time in canada

quote:

Originally posted by Yohan lol wut? you're almost an outcast if you hace conservative morals and values for a long time in canada

One of the reasons we are falling behind.

Re: Yesterdays Protests

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 The Anti coalition rally looks like a bunch of ordinary pissed off canadians with home made signs and flags.

So basically a bunch of uneducated morons who don't understand how our system works and think we are just an extension of the US system.

Re: Re: Yesterdays Protests

quote:

Originally posted by ChemEnhanced So basically a bunch of uneducated morons who don't understand how our system works and think we are just an extension of the US system.

Actually they demostrated quite well how the system works. One of the chants was "Just because it's legal, doesn't make it ethical"

Re: Re: Re: Yesterdays Protests

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Actually they demostrated quite well how the system works. One of the chants was "Just because it's legal, doesn't make it ethical"

(not suggesting I support the coalition)... one could just as validly argue that just because it is ethical doesn't mean it's the better choice.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Yesterdays Protests

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard (not suggesting I support the coalition)... one could just as validly argue that just because it is ethical doesn't mean it's the better choice.

So being unethical is ok as long as the outcome benefits you?

huh??

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yesterdays Protests

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 So being unethical is ok as long as the outcome benefits you? huh??

Now, now, that is not what I said. What I said was that the ethical decision is not always the better decision... how you evaluate better is up to you; however, I would not say that just because it benefits me it is the best decision (as you suggest I was saying). Sometimes doing the unethical thing benefits more people and produces more desirable results then an ethical action would have.

Good example... during the second world war, upon learning of the death camps the ethical decision for the western allies would have been to disrupt the infrastructure supporting the transport of prisoners and supplies to the camps. The consequence of this action would have been the loss of long range bombers either through enemy fire or to the Soviets who would have assumed control of them upon landing at Soviet airfields (the western allies could not make it to the camps and back without landing at Soviet controlled air fields). Because the allies made the unethical decision they retained air superiority during the latter stages of the war and were able to disrupt German war production more effectively then had they lost those long range bombers, which supported the Soviet victory.... in this case the unethical decision was the better of the options.

So explain to me the ethics of a coalition using the same method in your example. Im interested.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 So explain to me the ethics of a coalition using the same method in your example. Im interested.

ethics take a back seat to THE LAW, for starters. ethics is subjective, while the law is more clear. "the coalition is a legal political option" is TRUE. "the coalition is unethical" is subjective and up for debate.

to speak to the example given, if the coalition taking power is somehow deemed "unethical", but is judged (by history, I suppose) to have been the 'better' governing option for Canadians, then the 'unethical' move of the coaltion taking power would have been the greater benefit to Canadians.

it's a case of the ends justifying the means (though I personally do not agree with that Utilitarian philosophy as it allows for significant abuse).

some funny posters.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/litwinenko/3087325219/


http://www.flickr.com/photos/litwinenko/3088373816/

quote:

Originally posted by Yohan lol wut? you're almost an outcast if you hace conservative morals and values for a long time in canada

conservatism as a political movement.

To each their own as it relates to morals, but its time that the conservatives receive a due pounding.

Harper can't be only guy for the job.

quote:

Originally posted by 7-4-7 To each their own as it relates to morals, but its time that the conservatives receive a due pounding.

But of course. 12 years of flagrant corruption by the provincial AND federal Liberals (provincial less time, to clarify), as well as a corrupt municipal government clearly in kahoots with the provincial Liberals, and the conservatives are due for a pounding. What has Harper's government done that's anywhere close to Adscam or the Gun Registry?

Conservatives don't even have a "movement" in Canada. They're the minority. The only reason they've been able to sustain a minority government in Canada is because the Liberals were so open with their arrogance (remember "I'm entitled to my entitlement?") that citizens could not vote for them again in good conscience - and the NDP just isn't/wasn't a viable option.

People like you would be saying that "Conservatives" need to go even if their entire population consisted of 3 people thinking that we kinda maybe should have lower taxes and government spending.

quote:

Originally posted by smuncky some funny posters. ...

LOL @ the "Axis of Weasels". very clever.

(those "home-made signs" by "ordinary pissed-off Canadians" look rather well made to me, haha. FAIL Jay )

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut But of course. 12 years of flagrant corruption by the provincial AND federal Liberals (provincial less time, to clarify), as well as a corrupt municipal government clearly in kahoots with the provincial Liberals, and the conservatives are due for a pounding. What has Harper's government done that's anywhere close to Adscam or the Gun Registry? Conservatives don't even have a "movement" in Canada. They're the minority. The only reason they've been able to sustain a minority government in Canada is because the Liberals were so open with their arrogance (remember "I'm entitled to my entitlement?") that citizens could not vote for them again in good conscience - and the NDP just isn't/wasn't a viable option. People like you would be saying that "Conservatives" need to go even if their entire population consisted of 3 people thinking that we kinda maybe should have lower taxes and government spending.

Yeah I dont even disagree with most of what you said; your tact could use a little polish. A+ on the "people like me comment".

Most liberals or "people like me" who have any political savvy are for the most part not in our glory and have not been for sometime with some of the blunders that have resulted in the ever fading past. However the point was more that recently and for the last little while the libs have been bent over the bench for their mistakes; and only because of very persuasive american style attack ads and good conservative political posturing have the conservatives been able to capitalise.

And as my messages stated previously it seems that the conservatives are well on their way to a pounding.

I'm not entirley sure how and why conservatives always seem to perpetuate the "underdog" image; sure I would agree that conservative doctrines are not the natural persuasion of most Canadians however the fact that the cons have held an origami government for the last while should no less negate your claim that there isnt a conservative movement. There is, it is a cold political breeze that blows far too hard from the west and couldn't knock over even one liberal campaign poster in the east.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut What has Harper's government done that's anywhere close to Adscam or the Gun Registry?

Other than being hypocrites who are selling the public this "attack on democracy" positioning that they themselves were ready to entertain a couple of years back? (hahaha the Bloc aren't dirty separatists or the NDP dirty socialists when they are adding their signatures to a paper monsieur Harper is sending to the GG though, right?)

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT LOL @ the "Axis of Weasels". very clever. (those "home-made signs" by "ordinary pissed-off Canadians" look rather well made to me, haha. FAIL Jay )

I was actually at the protest. Those guys were the only ones with those signs. I figure they must be good graphics artists who spent money at a printer. Compare that to the union made signs everyone was carrying that said that they were part of the 62% majority.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 So explain to me the ethics of a coalition using the same method in your example. Im interested.

You'll note that I did state I support the coalition, right? You do understand I was just arguing the validity of the statement itself, right?

What you ask would necessitate a hypothetical answer, which I tend to avoid. History has to be the judge of whether or not a decision was the best one available, as the consequences stemming from decisions of this magnitude cannot be evaluated until years to decades after the fact. It is possible that the coalition succeeding could result in a better outcome then it failing, if it did then history would judge it to be the better of the two options, despite being unethical (unethical in my view because representatives of the people should declare their intentions clearly prior to an election and should have to disclose any material change in their intentions in advance of any action thus allowing those that they represent to ratify it... of course based on my view we have never had an ethical government).

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Conservatives don't even have a "movement" in Canada. They're the minority.

That's a ridiculous statement, as all movements start off as minorities.

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard You'll note that I did state I support the coalition, right? You do understand I was just arguing the validity of the statement itself, right?

i know... im just curious to learn your perspective here.

quote:

What you ask would necessitate a hypothetical answer, which I tend to avoid. History has to be the judge of whether or not a decision was the best one available, as the consequences stemming from decisions of this magnitude cannot be evaluated until years to decades after the fact. It is possible that the coalition succeeding could result in a better outcome then it failing, if it did then history would judge it to be the better of the two options, despite being unethical (unethical in my view because representatives of the people should declare their intentions clearly prior to an election and should have to disclose any material change in their intentions in advance of any action thus allowing those that they represent to ratify it... of course based on my view we have never had an ethical government).

Fair enough. Your arguement is that ethical is subjective. I think a better slogan would be "Just because it's legal, doesn't make it democratic"

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.