|
Canadian Travel ID Cards? (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| drgoodvibe |
| quote: | ah, yes.. say hello to your politics teacher. Socialism? It's governance, or should I call it exploitation, restriction :clown:
Let's bring up the ideal state - anarchism; who was it that said these words: society can only advance when people feel able to question authority and tradition..? Whereas, in this supposedly ideal system, the public just accepts it - it doesn't even question it, or let alone oppose it.. therefore, communism at its strongest = when the masses don't even realize that they are regulated by The Big Brother :stongue: |
The ideal state - anarchism?? Hrmmmm That would require a people that could live without rules.
Think about it, there could be no culture, no music, no art, simply becuase people would be too scared to go out of their fortress they call a house. If we have an enlightend people who would not succumb to greed or hate or violence and so on and so on then great anarchism is perfect. Unfortunatly we don't have that. We also don't have much of a society that can think for itself yet.:D
Thousands of years man has been creating society and to be honest I really can't think of any that was governed solely by anarchistic means.
Besides, people can question authority, sure it may not seem so, but people do have freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Canada isn't Iran, or the old Soviet Union, or China where demonstrators/activists are thrown in jail and never seen/heard of again.:tongue2 |
|
|
| TranceGeek |
hmmm, so...
:stongue: :haha: |
|
|
| Mako |
| quote: | Originally posted by TranceGeek
hmmm, so...
:stongue: :haha: |
Yeah... what were we talking about?
lol
:p |
|
|
| Paris |
| As of December 31st, anyone that is not a canadian resident must apply for a Permanent Resident card that cost $50 in order to re enter the country. This only applies to Landed Immigrants ect... Not canadians (Anyone with a canadian passport.) I believe that for $150 more, you are better off applying for the citizenship! But if you can't come back to this country, maybe it's for the best. I love Canada and what it has to offer but the lifestyle is not the same as Europe. I feel like the only thing I do in this country is work work work. Canada is all about making money and then leaving to go somewhere else! |
|
|
| brunette |
| quote: | Originally posted by drgoodvibe
The ideal state - anarchism?? Hrmmmm That would require a people that could live without rules.
...and so on....
|
You're incorrect in assuming that anarchism insinuates chaos and social disorder due to lack of higher authority. You see, people would eventually reach tranquility and peace naturally because survival is based not on competition but cooperation, therefore you have your own ethics telling you what's right and wrong, what's good and bad for you; you're moral - you don't need someone telling you that, n'est pas?
Think about it, in the past half century of international relations, all conflicts have been on accounts of repression and supremacy of higher powers.. There is no anarchy because the system has already been corrupted, institutions have already been established that suppress individualism, making the public believe that the governance is absolutely essential (like you here.. :p:p) But you see, domination contradicts human nature. |
|
|
| drgoodvibe |
| quote: | Originally posted by brunette
You're incorrect in assuming that anarchism insinuates chaos and social disorder due to lack of higher authority. You see, people would eventually reach tranquility and peace naturally because survival is based not on competition but cooperation, therefore you have your own ethics telling you what's right and wrong, what's good and bad for you; you're moral - you don't need someone telling you that, n'est pas? |
I can't agree with you there, I have a bleaker outlook. When you say people would eventually reach tranquilitiy and peace, I would imagine that its only a product of pure chaos. The realization that man must cooperate with each other instead of dominate each other would be an afterthought. So after much death and suffering we'll reach the goal of anarchistic self government? Is it worth the price we'd have to pay?
History shows that, man is greedy and selfish, and capabable of a host of negative achievements. We already know that some people are just simply not moral and are anti-social and will not like the status quo whatever it may be, be it a eutopia of anarchism or "governance" as you put it.
Ofcourse i'm not taking into account the "enlightenment" factor. Should people one day realize that they can live peacefully and happily with eachother cooperating for the common good, without feelings of greed or envy and so on then wow great, but again I don't see that happening any time soon. Wars have been started over women, over land, over self interest, over anything. You cannot believe that these such selfish endeavours will just go away, as a cause of people being more moral.
| quote: |
Think about it, in the past half century of international relations, all conflicts have been on accounts of repression and supremacy of higher powers.. There is no anarchy because the system has already been corrupted, institutions have already been established that suppress individualism, making the public believe that the governance is absolutely essential (like you here.. :p:p) But you see, domination contradicts human nature. |
I totally agree with you about the fact that repression and supremacy has been institutionalized. Where we're different is that I do believe that some sort of governance is essential at the moment realistically:D. People just simply not educated enough and rather moral enough without being fanatically religious.
Governance surely must change, foreign policy must change sure. But why does it have to be sudden? Why can't governance slowly fade over time into an anarchistic idea? Obviously this would take centuries but it takes that long for generations to be educated and policy makers to change.
Oh and by the way, so if there is no government, who makes roads?
If the people all decide to make roads and sustain them, then who will make food? So one group makes roads one group makes food.. then who will make the tools they need? So another group forms and makes the tools. But what if the road makers think that the tool makers aren't working hard enough? What if the road makers have to work the hardest? Maybe they'd want some more food then the rest of the people since they work the hardest?
You can see where i'm going with that. I just don't have faith in people being able to govern themselves at the moment really. Its a very neo-con attitude eventhough i'm pretty left of centre. ;) |
|
|
| drgoodvibe |
| whoa i just realized how long that was.. sorry, don't bother reading it! |
|
|
| dEsidEL |
yes! you and ur endless policy rhetoric!! :toothless
|
|
|
| brunette |
No, no, don't stop :( I just want to let it be known that I'm not arguing against you but on a par with you :D it's not the question of whether you're wrong and I'm right, and vice versa.. - it's just fun :D
| quote: | Originally posted by drgoodvibe
Wars have been started over women, over land, over self interest, over anything. You cannot believe that these such selfish endeavours will just go away, as a cause of people being more moral. |
Certainly, there are power-hungry individuals, like we've seen repeatedly in history, but that just means that the masses fed their cravings by believing that they need to be governed by someone.
Of course, I agree with you when you say that disobedience is one of social virtues, because if man didn't challange the authorities, presently we would have an entirely different world order. However, defiance itself started because of noncompliance to the rules -- because the rules are constricting freedom in particular. And who makes the rules = the authorities.
| quote: | | Where we're different is that I do believe that some sort of governance is essential at the moment realistically :D. People just simply not educated enough and rather moral enough without being fanatically religious. |
Yes, right now some kind of supremacy is crucial because, as I said, people are used to being controlled and regulated by institutions and higher powers. But we all just gave in to this supremacy of state. Who was it that said that when we blindly adopt religion and political system, we become robots and we cease to grow..?
So, my concern is that in this hierarchy equality can never exist.... and not that it ever did in the modern structure of the world.
| quote: | Governance surely must change, foreign policy must change sure. But why does it have to be sudden? Why can't governance slowly fade over time into an anarchistic idea?
Oh and by the way, so if there is no government, who makes roads? |
Who makes roads? People do. How? They follow a structure that you described up there. My question is: do they need to be organized by someone else? Does a tool maker need someone to direct him to the road makers? No, he will realize that that is what he needs to do in order to survive.. and so on, up to a fully self-sufficient society, which is not at all impossible.
I'm not saying that we immediately get rid of authority and government and switch to anarchy because the people are not ready for that change; because the society is sustained on rules, we are accustomed to rules and habits.
When you're born you immediately start to succumb to these rules, but you don't question it because you feel that it guides you somewhere. But it's terrifying to realize that it guides you (not guides you, but is in charge of you) all your life! |
|
|
| drgoodvibe |
Alright, I went and got my tea, and i'm ready for this little baby!! I'm going to start saving all these chats, there golden!!
| quote: | Originally posted by brunette
No, no, don't stop :( I just want to let it be known that I'm not arguing against you but on a par with you :D it's not the question of whether you're wrong and I'm right, and vice versa.. - it's just fun :D |
Don't yah worry I won't stop :D. I definitely think we're at par and neither one of is in the "lead" or has supremacy over the other ;) Definitely fun !!there is no such thing as wrong or right in politics.. well unless your against the majority then your wrong!! :whip: :D
| quote: |
Certainly, there are power-hungry individuals, like we've seen repeatedly in history, but that just means that the masses fed their cravings by believing that they need to be governed by someone.
Of course, I agree with you when you say that disobedience is one of social virtues, because if man didn't challange the authorities, presently we would have an entirely different world order. However, defiance itself started because of noncompliance to the rules -- because the rules are constricting freedom in particular. And who makes the rules = the authorities. |
But what happens when we the people make the rules, and there are no authorities? I'm not exactly sure if through simple moral virtue that we'd all have the same basic rules. Unless the whole world gets educated on the same standard then maybe we might all have the same sort of moral virtue, though even then there will be discrepancy in each indviduals rules.
So one groups moral virtues might not be anothers, which then simply divides us, and creates cliques. Eventually these cliques, since it is human nature to want to be a part of a group, will try to be mutually exclusive. In turn we have distrust and competition over the two groups.
Out of noncompliance for the rules will come compliance once again. Morally virtuaes rules are admirable but it would take some effort to have everyone agree one the same sort of rules then. How we get to that level, through education, through brainwashing :D, through sudden human enlightenment is another matter.
| quote: |
Yes, right now some kind of supremacy is crucial because, as I said, people are used to being controlled and regulated by institutions and higher powers. But we all just gave in to this supremacy of state. Who was it that said that when we blindly adopt religion and political system, we become robots and we cease to grow..?
So, my concern is that in this hierarchy equality can never exist.... and not that it ever did in the modern structure of the world. |
In an age of global capitalism, money rules all, its human nature to be greedy. So for one man to be rich and powerful he must impoverish many others. Equality can never exist becuase the people who have power want to keep it. This ideal has been completely institutionalized I completely agree.
What can we do to change the balance of power? Revolution? At what cost? The balance of power must be changed gradually over time.
Through the 60s we had a remarkable amount of people questioning the powers that be. It was a time when people questioned their faith, and their government. Those times have not been totally qaushed though. As it seems government is giving way to big business, no longer will government maintain the status quo but probably Walmart!
I really do see a time when people will start to question big business, but you see, the consumerist ideal will never ever let that happen.
People are too used to having a new car every couple years, having their McDonalds on demand, being able to get a new cellphone every year. Consumerism drives the economy and inturn drives a neo-conservative government.
So then maybe it isnt governance thats the problem, maybe its the people? Maybe we have to change peoples attitudes? Maybe having people stop driving and take the subway? Or go actually make dinner instead of eating at McDonalds every day? I know its hard for you to understand becuase you don't do any of that! But after living in Dallas Texas for 3 years I can totally understand that kind of attitude.
Taking away what drives big business, will cause it to change for the better, which in turn will change government.
| quote: |
Who makes roads? People do. How? They follow a structure that you described up there. My question is: do they need to be organized by someone else? Does a tool maker need someone to direct him to the road makers? No, he will realize that that is what he needs to do in order to survive.. and so on, up to a fully self-sufficient society, which is not at all impossible. |
Ahh again I have such a bleaker attitude, I don't think the tool maker will know what he needs to do to survive, or will exactly want to get up and work hard everyday. What if everybody wants to be a toolmaker instead of a roadmaker becuase roadmaking is harder work? Would roadmakers get paid more, or say in a society withouth money get compensated more with say more food? Won't that harbor some resentment from the other people who believe that their work is just as hard? Its this sort of pettiness that makes us dumb humans kill eachother over.
Maybe generations later after man has gone through the growing pains and fought its wars and realized finally that history will keep repeating itself that the way your referring to is the better way.
| quote: |
I'm not saying that we immediately get rid of authority and government and switch to anarchy because the people are not ready for that change; because the society is sustained on rules, we are accustomed to rules and habits.
When you're born you immediately start to succumb to these rules, but you don't question it because you feel that it guides you somewhere. But it's terrifying to realize that it guides you (not guides you, but is in charge of you) all your life! |
I couldnt agree with ya more, Its going to take a very long long time before we see any change for the better, but until man can live without succumbing to its baser emotions and is educated enough to realize the importance of cooperation then anarchy will only lead to death, destruction and the installation of another despot who can bring peace through military might and dominance. |
|
|
| drgoodvibe |
| i think thats the longest post i've ever written.. :D lol |
|
|
| disko-kandi |
the Maple Leaf Card coming into force has been announced for two years. No news there, really!
The Maple Leaf card is intended for old & new landed immigrants only; making the original landed immigrant papers void. If landed immigrants want to travel outside of Canada and intend to return to Canada without jeopardizing their permanent resident status, they must be in possession of this card.
Essentially, it is meant to provide a back-stop for the Canadian Government and to be able to monitor the movements into and out of Canada. In the past, under the old rule of immigration law (til June 2002) it was impossible for the Canadian Government to keep tab of violators of the old law i.e. where landed immigrants were allowed to leave Canada for 6 months, had to return for 6 months in order to leave again for 6 months; exception: unless you were able to come up with a valid reason or able to prove that you could fulfil one of the 4 reason for out-staying the allowed 6 months, like some kind of studies, working for a Canadian company abraod, taking care of a family member where noone else is available and such.
I wouldn't necessarily say that I agree with this new mechanism, but in light of the 9/11 attacks, it is no surprise that they would want to protect themselves somehow.
I do agree though with the general opinion that it is an infringement on personal privacy, and that it could be the beginning of a police state-type era. ...
However, being in the 'business', and having a pretty good insight into what is happening behind the scenes, I know that even the people working on chisseling out this new law, are not quite comfortable with it either. So, they are looking into making amends, -which may take some time though. But in the meantime, this is what's been decided on and this is what's got to be done. For now ...
With the recent change in government, we've received a new Immigration Minister, and she seems to have her head on straight, unlike our last Immigration Minister, the Honourable Coderre, who did nothing but talk about improvements. A whole revamping of the immigration and refugee determination system is underway, as we speak. So there is hope...
I'm affected by it too and I need to abide by it as well! |
|
|
|
|
