Conservatives can only excite their base through hate based policies.
this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2023
169 points (92.9% liked)
World News
32350 readers
290 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
That's "common sense policies" in conservative speak.
They voted for body autonomy to discontinue all mask mandates, but then vote to ban body autonomy for children, even with their parents and doctors consent.
Good for nothing Hippocrates.
If the CPC gets in power they will erode women's rights as a priority over climate change and homelessness.
They will bring back banned weapons as a priority to the drug and mental health care crisis.
They will erode education as a priority to food and access to affordable housing.
Rednecks will vote for cool Millhouse to own the Libs and defend their 1st and 2nd amendment rights.
Idiocracy had come home to roost.
defend their 1st and 2nd amendment rights.
I thought this was in Canada.
It is. Unfortunately many conservatives don't understand that we have our own set of amendments completely separate from the US. Except for the few that really really want to recognize that everyone is equal and that Manitoba is a province.
Let's just hope liberal voters stop owning themselves by voting for the LPC instead of the NDP.
Of all the things in Canada that needs fixing such as health care, educational funding, climate change mitigation, green energy pivot, housing, cost of of living, they decide to bully the few children trying to live their best life. Fucking wild. And truely disappointing.
Except nazis. They can fuck off.
This is genuinely horrifying. I know I shouldn't expect anything but the most despicable behaviour from conservative voters, but even so...
Just last month my sister moved to Canada with her two kids, because they needed to escape this exact bullshit from the Conservatives over there. Her daughter needs to be on puberty blockers right now, and getting them in the UK is a hellish experience for any parent of a trans child.
I can't even begin to imagine how I explain to her that conservatives here are pursuing the exact same regressive, hateful, murderous policy agenda. And that despite that, they're probably going to win the next federal election, because our idiotic voters think that flipping a switch back and forth every decade is the equivalent of meaningful change.
If they don’t get a majority then the Conservatives need to find another party to work with to form government.
Pierre’s time is mostly spent shitting on all of them so it might bit him on the ass.
How anyone can be surprised at this is mind boggling to me..
More like disappointed. These are the same people that claim the liberal policies are divisive and creating an us vs them environment in Canada.
Whereas, the majority in Canada care deeply about social policies like healthcare, access to education, the harm of religious ideology, access to housing, the environment, the CBC, pot, policing, and the list goes on, and not necessarily in this order.
Shocked that people lack compassion for Canadians, especially if they are disadvantaged.
Outraged at the hypocrisy of it all.
Well, as an outsider who sees Canada for what it is - just another capitalistic white supremacist patriarchy like the rest of us, the lack of compassion is no surprise at all. It really shouldn't be to anyone paying attention, it's literally what our systems breed to survive.
Pretending like Canada is immune or somehow above any of the shit we're dealing with globally is naive yet unwarranted exceptionalism at best..
Yes those problems do exist, and considering the conservatives position on these matters, we have work to do.
But I'm happy with our immigration policies, improvements are needed for sure.
I think racism is an issue, and there are many great examples of how as a country we rise above it.
Lack of compassion is a significant problem for sure, the drug addled population are losing the fight against addiction.
The indigenous nations have been treated poorly for sure. That is our nations shame.
But I believe passionately that being a woman, minority, or a transgendered person, Canada is the safest country and there are plenty of opportunities to thrive. And that goes for the rest of us cis-gendered, anglo-caucasians as well.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Conservative delegates voted Saturday to add some new social conservative policies to their policy playbook, including a proposal to limit access to transgender health care for minors and do away with vaccine mandates.
While some members warned these policies could be weaponized by their political opponents to hurt their standing among more moderate voters, a strong majority of the delegates on hand voted for one motion that stated children should be prohibited from gender-related "life-altering medicinal or surgical interventions," and another motion that said Canadians should have "bodily autonomy" when it comes to vaccines and other health treatments.
About 69 per cent of the delegates agreed that young people should be barred from gender-affirming care, which sometimes includes hormone-related treatments that delay puberty or promote the development of masculine or feminine sex characteristics.
The vaccine issue sparked comments about events that transpired during the COVID-19 pandemic, including high-profile freedom rallies.
About 68 per cent of delegates voted on the motion to "affirm Canadians have the freedom and right to refuse vaccines."
Discussion about the motion focused on Jordan Peterson, a professor with a large following in right-wing circles, who was ordered by the University of Toronto to take social media training in the wake of complaints about his controversial online posts and statements.
The original article contains 300 words, the summary contains 209 words. Saved 30%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
What is "transgender healthcare for minors"?
Puberty blockers, any any acknowledgment by a medical professional that they might be trans and treating them on a personal level in that way.
Probably also includes counseling or psych treatment for depression and anxiety and suicidality related to this plus preventing doctors from using preferred names or pronouns while also closing resources that these kids could have turned to for community support. The cruelty is the point.
Ok. Now I know what side I'm on.
Wait, they were hiring people based on skin color? That was legal? What the fuck.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity_(business)
Diversity is believed to bring substantial benefits such as better decision making and improved problem solving,[11] greater creativity and innovation, which leads to enhanced product development, and more successful marketing to different types of customers.[7][12] Diversity is also claimed to enhance organizations' abilities to compete in global markets.[13] Simply recognizing diversity in a corporation helps link the variety of talents within the organization.
The diversity that creates that is diversity of thought and life experiences.
To me, the idea that you can just fill boxes with people from x race or x gender on the base that that characteristic is what determines what I mentioned above, is one of the most racist and sexist things someone can do.
its a policy designed to combat centuries of racism and sexism which has put people at a measurable disadvantage. its actively anti-racist and anti-sexist, but i imagine you're just looking to be outraged. the reality is that a lot of companies will basically just hire white men for most roles unless they have to do otherwise. this is one way of trying to fix that observable injustice.
Ah yes, selective discrimination based on race and gender is anti-racist and anti-sexist. So glad we advanced as a society enough for this to make sense in some people's heads...
We live in a time where there are black people that experienced extreme wealth in their lives and white people that know nothing other than extreme poverty (this one has always existed), and to take nothing of that into consideration other than just the skin color is idiotic.
But hey, thank you for admitting that it isn't actually about improving productivity and output at companies, but just to tick percentage boxes so that your virtue signaling intake is filled for the day.
Ah yes, selective discrimination based on race and gender is anti-racist and anti-sexist. So glad we advanced as a society enough for this to make sense in some people’s heads…
i mean, you seem to have already made up your mind on this. there is a significant body of evidence backing up the systemic disadvantages faced by people who aren't straight white men. the fact that you are unwilling or unable to seek out that data on your own, and instead insist that any measures to counter observable race and sex based discrimination are themselves race and sex based discrimination tells me all i need to know. what would you propose we do about the observable discrepancies in hiring? nothing? if its nothing, you suck.
We live in a time where there are black people that experienced extreme wealth in their lives and white people that know nothing other than extreme poverty (this one has always existed), and to take nothing of that into consideration other than just the skin color is idiotic.
statistically, white people are on average richer than nonwhite people, and men are on average richer than women. the fact that white people can be poor and black people can be rich means exactly fuckall on the scale of a population. and who says nothing of that is taken into consideration? you're making that claim based on... what? intuition? prior biases? i'm sorry, but the idea that a corporation is going to spend money on hiring somebody just because they're a person of color, a woman, or both is just mind blowingly ill informed. that has never been how race-based hiring works.
But hey, thank you for admitting that it isn’t actually about improving productivity and output at companies, but just to tick percentage boxes so that your virtue signaling intake is filled for the day.
there is quite a bit of research to suggest that diverse hiring practices positively impact productivity, but even if it didn't, we should still make policy decisions to reduce the impact of systemic discrimination, because that improves the lives of people who are systemically disadvantaged. but whatever, yeah, people only make these kinds of policy decisions to signal virtue, its not like there are any problems with how our society is organized, or people who need help.
to be clear, race-based hiring is a concession constructed by the ruling class. it is an acknowledgement that systemic discrimination exists without a commitment to guarantee the well being of all people. all people should have the opportunity to thrive, and i would advocate for much more far reaching policy for all kinds of disadvantaged groups. but there are specific systemic forces discriminating against minorities that ought to be addressed, and they will not go away unless we take steps to make them go away.
The thing is averages don't mean shit when you're talking about individual people, because individual experiences always deviate from the average, especially if you talk about average wealth where a few millionaires and billionaires skew the data for a lot of poor people.
But sure, let's follow your logic. Black people on average are poorer and have worse jobs, so we need to discriminate in their favour.
Well, statistically there is also a lot of evidence that black people on average commit more crimes than white people.
So should I be scared of a black person I cross on the street? Following your logic, yes. Following mine, no.
The thing is averages don’t mean shit when you’re talking about individual people, because individual experiences always deviate from the average, especially if you talk about average wealth where a few millionaires and billionaires skew the data for a lot of poor people.
i'm sorry, but "averages don't mean shit when you're talking about individual people" is such a cop out. statistical measures are literally THE MOST reliable way of determining truth that we have, and its basically the only way to prove something is real with high certainty. do you seriously think that professional sociologists don't take outliers into account when talking about average wealth? that's like, literally grade school statistics, the kind of analysis being done for measures of social well-being are built to account for confounding variables, and a discrepancy still exists when you control for pretty much every other factor.
But sure, let’s follow your logic. Black people on average are poorer and have worse jobs, so we need to discriminate in their favour. Well, statistically there is also a lot of evidence that black people on average commit more crimes than white people. So should I be scared of a black person I cross on the street? Following your logic, yes. Following mine, no.
i'm not following a "logic", i'm presenting what the research has shown to be factual, or at least highly likely. we do know that black people on average commit more crimes. if you want to use that as an excuse to discriminate against black people, you can do that, but an evidence based look into why crime happens and what factors go into why somebody commits crimes does not support that position. because yes, criminologists and sociologists have actually examined the "why" of the statistical connection between criminal behavior and blackness, and didn't just stop at "oh, black people are statistically over-represented in prison populations, that's weird."
we know that poverty is like, THE determining factor in criminality. people who are in desperate straits are far more likely to commit crimes, black or not. because black people are more likely than white people to be in poverty, they are also statistically more likely to commit crime. of course, being convicted of a crime then makes it harder to get work, and puts significant financial burden on the family of the incarcerated, driving the incarcerated person and their loved ones further into poverty, and increasing their likelihood to commit crime in the future as their circumstances worsen. that doesn't account for everything, though. we also know that black people are significantly more likely to be convicted and sentenced when they do interact with the justice system, and white people can often avoid jail time that is inevitable for comparable crimes committed by a black person.
in fact, the systemic factors which drive the impoverishment of black people are the largely the same factors which drive criminal behavior in black people, and which punish black people more harshly if they do end up committing crimes. systemic racism. poverty. urban decay. the prison industrial complex. discriminatory laws. there is metric shit-tons of literature out there for you to read on this stuff, as you obviously have not done, considering that you wrote "black people are poorer than white people" and "black people commit more crimes than white people" right next to each other, and failed to even consider how those two statements might be related before defaulting to a 50 year old racist talking point.
i get that you've bought into the whole "actually its the LEFT who are the racist ones" talking point, and maybe even the "christian white men are the most oppressed group in this country" talking point, but there are thousands of empirical studies showing that people of color, and especially black people, are faced with specific challenges when it comes to acquiring a decent quality of life, and that these challenges cannot be explained away as anything other than an ongoing social process by which black people are deprived of resources by virtue of their identity.